In this generation, there is a phenomenon that has been chronicled by academics and dramatists alike. It is well known throughout all levels of society. At first, it was viewed as a myth; now it carries the veracity and weight of any other commonly-reported social phenomenon.
In documentary fashion, motion picture theaters and television productions have presented it many times. It is a subject loaded with dramatic potential, both in the realms of human pathos and foreboding paranoia.
But, of surpassing interest is its spiritual dimension. It spans the fullness of all questions surrounding God's creation, His sovereignty and the mysteries inherent in the dark forces who oppose Him. It brings Paul's statement about, "… principalities, powers and rulers of darkness in high places," into stark, glaring focus.
In polite society, this phenomenon is virtually taboo. Merely to bring it up places one in the category of the kooks and the crazies. A courteous silence surrounds reports of the wondrous event, rather like that accorded ghost stories, tales about bigfoot and dinosaurs in the remote swamps of Africa.
The macabre and puzzling phenomenon to which we refer is that of UFO abduction.
As we approach the new millennium, we finally have enough information about this subject to draw certain conclusions … all of which are dark, forbidding and frightening.
More than that, they carry elements of an unclean, putrescent evil that draws us ever deeper into the arena of the spiritually impure. Here, one realizes, spiritual combat is a throbbing reality. There is the real sense that, by probing into the dark recesses of this pit without the help of God and the presence of Christ, one could suffer very real spiritual injury.
But for the Christian, there is hope. Not surprisingly, the Bible provides the precise information that makes this unexplainable circumstance quite explainable.
Biblically, the contemporary UFO abduction story becomes a mystery solved. More than that, it is yet another prophetic truth that reminds us just how close we really are to the end of the Church Age.
This having been stated, let us return to an event that subtly changed the path of modern history. In the early 60's, it became the subject of countless articles in the top magazines. It was documented on prime-time television. And it launched a best-selling book: The Interrupted Journey, by John Fuller.
A Classic Case of Missing Time
It was a mid-September night in 1961. Barney and Betty Hill were returning from a vacation trip to Quebec. Driving south between Lancaster and Portsmouth, New Hampshire, they found themselves being pursued by a mystery ship that, at first, looked like a star or satellite. Then, its movements became more erratic. It appeared to be coming lower.
At last, they could see that it was a bright, round glowing object. After a time, they saw it at treetop height. It appeared to them as a flying disc, larger than an airliner. Stopping the car, Barney found that he could look into its large windows with his binoculars
There, he was horrified to see humanoid creatures, with staring eyes that sent a profound hysteria coursing through his entire being. He ran back to the car and attempted to escape. At that point, everything lapsed into blackness for a period that they would later determine was about two hours of missing time.
The next thing they knew, they were consciously aware of driving the last few miles into Portsmouth. Arriving home in a curious state of distress, they were totally unaware they had been the object of what has now become the archetypal UFO abduction case.
In the period that followed, it took them literally years to unravel the mystery of what had happened during those two hours. And when they finally succeeded, their horrific memories became the subject of a best-selling book mentioned above, and a full-length motion picture.
What had befallen them became a classic case, containing all the now-familiar elements of abduction. First, there was the complete blanking of their memories. Then Barney found himself subject to extreme anxiety, accompanied by nightmares and the inability to sleep. Both were highly disturbed, but didn't know why.
Without the lengthy help of psychiatrist Benjamin Simon, M.D., it is doubtful that they would ever have unscrambled the source of their ensuing mental distress. Finally, however, the details came out.
These details included descriptions of the huge "spaceship," its crew and interior arrangement, along with a remembered "star map" which had hung on the wall. With the help of astronomers, Betty later recalled it as depicting an area of space in the constellation we call Pegasus, and the star Alpha Pegasi. She labeled other stars on her map with well-known star names. At the time, radio astronomers even noted that a mysterious radio source seemed to originate from this exact spot. Some speculated that the signal might have an intelligent source.
The abduction also included a series of "medical exams." Both Barney and Betty were subjected to these. As in other well-known cases, the examinations seemed to focus upon their reproductive systems.
Both were sure that the beings came from another planet, and were simply bent upon doing some sort of local reconnaissance in our solar system. There was much speculation about their methods and motives.
It was the sixties, when old ways were being dropped, and a new world of socialized idealism was on the horizon. Space travelers, inter-species medical exams and the hint that we were about to embark upon intergalactic diplomacy caught the public imagination.
Their story fit the times as surely as Star Trek. The Hills were, for a time, launched into unwilling celebrity. Then, interest in their encounter faded into what for them was a blessed obscurity. A few years later, Barney passed on. After that, Betty occasionally spoke of the event, expressing the certainty that her abductors had meant no harm, but were simply an advanced scouting party.
Still, when their experience exploded into the public consciousness in 1966, they were greeted by ridicule and official skepticism.
In the years since, the watershed event that brought the Hills to fame has not faded away. Rather, it has become a booming enterprise. As we shall see, these strange abductions are a growing presence. At present, hundreds, thousands and most likely even hundreds of thousands have encountered a similar fate.
The Hills, and others like them, became convinced that planet Earth is being visited by explorers, representing many planets and races. Abductees believe that we are only a short time away from being told "the whole truth," in a global disclosure that will reveal many bizarre secrets now known only by certain high government officials.
During their abductions, they were told by the aliens that humanity has nothing to fear; that they are here on a mission of peace. In fact, these "space travelers" often hint that they are humanity's creators, come back in these last days to check up on their work.
Method in Their Madness
But as one tries to make sense of the aliens' collective utterances, gaping inconsistencies appear. Serious research yields great doubt about their beneficent intent. And after a little more study, even their identity comes into question. Rather than being benevolent emissaries, they seem to have darker motives.
And rather than being space travelers, they seem much more like the fallen ones described in the Bible. In fact, they seem exactly like the angels and demons who followed Satan, and who are engaged in an ongoing warfare against the elect of God. Christians need to be aware of these events, and the dark forces behind them.
What they are doing and why they are doing it are questions that must be dealt with by the faithful. And why are they doing it just now, as the events of Bible prophecy seem so close to fulfillment?
Historically, there is a quality of inscrutability surrounding the UFO phenomenon. Citizens the world over have reported sightings for years, as governments the world over explain them away with clearly absurd rationalizations. "Swamp gas," "the planet Venus" and "spent Russian rocket boosters" have been used this way literally thousands of times.
Now, however, there is growing evidence that our government leaders have known all along that something was afoot.
Operation Majestic 12
Of late, several writers claim to have unearthed above-top-secret government documents that directly pertain to modern UFO history. Perhaps the most famous of these is manually-typed on paper that has apparently met the tests of historical experts. That is, it passes examination for age, chemical composition and watermarking.
Recently, its authenticity has come into question, but it is so representative of an entire class of similar documents that we include it here. It provides the information needed to explain the biblical link between the dark heavenly forces and the one-world government so clearly presented in the prophecies of the Bible.
Each page of this document is stamped "TOP SECRET/MAJIC - EYES ONLY." It is headed, "BRIEFING DOCUMENT: OPERATION MAJESTIC 12 - PREPARED FOR PRESIDENT-ELECT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER: (EYES ONLY) - 18 NOVEMBER, 1952."
Apparently, "Majestic 12" was the title given to a group of 12 high-ranking insiders. All of them were Admirals, Generals or government scientists. According to the document, itself, the group "was established by special classified executive order of President Truman on 24 September, 1947."
This white paper deals with the subject of disc-shaped aerial objects. They soon came to be called "flying saucers," the term coined after pilot Kenneth Arnold sighted flying discs over the Cascade Mountains in Washington. That happened on June 24, 1947, the year that flying saucers came of age.
These are mentioned in the MAJIC report, along with the famous Roswell event. In part, it says, "… little of substance was learned about the objects until a local rancher reported that one had crashed in a remote region of New Mexico located approximately seventy-five miles northwest of Roswell Army Air Base (now Walker Field).
"On 07 July, 1947, a secret operation was begun to assure recovery of the wreckage of this object for scientific study. During the course of this operation, aerial reconnaissance discovered that four small human-like beings had apparently ejected from the craft at some point before it exploded."
The 8th page of this document is a short memo to the Secretary of Defense, purportedly from President Harry Truman, dated September 24, 1947:
"Dear Secretary Forrestal:
"As per our recent conversation on this matter, you are hereby authorized to proceed with all due speed and caution upon your undertaking. Hereafter this matter shall be referred to only as Operation Majestic Twelve.
"It continues to be my feeling that any future considerations relative to the ultimate disposition of this matter should rest solely with the Office of the President following appropriate discussions with yourself, Dr. Bush and the Director of Central Intelligence."
It now seems that this and other similar documents are authentic. This being the case, we must assume that top-level government agencies have been pursuing their interaction with UFOs ever since.
Close Encounters
Who were the "four small human-like beings," mentioned in this mysterious document? Were they really from outer space? Until recently, it might have seemed that this was indeed the case. But evidence now available through study of the UFO abduction phenomenon offers an alternative suggestion - one that is in perfect agreement with the biblical world view. They may, in an unexpected way, be from right here on planet Earth!
In the 1950s, various flying lights in the sky were sighted around the world. The year 1956 is considered a "flap" year by UFO historians. That is, it witnessed numerous, blatant sightings that popped up on numerous fronts. During this decade, even Washington, D.C. was the site of a huge display of the mysterious lights.
The '60s brought continuing waves of these sightings. Famed astronomer and UFO researcher J. Allen Hynek called these events, "Close Encounters Of The First Kind." Lights, spheres, disks and similar phenomena came to be considered so normal that belief in them was a given. Of course, everyone pretended to be a scoffer. But general acceptance of "flying saucers" was almost universal.
Hynek labeled sightings that left ground traces as, "Close Encounters Of The Second Kind." If beings were sighted leaving the craft, the event was logged as a "Close Encounter Of The Third Kind."
Beginning in the 1950s and continuing on into the '80s, the Air Force's Project Blue Book supposedly recorded and analyzed UFO sightings. Dr. Hynek exposed its real purpose: It was actually used as a front for UFO secrecy, while the real mission of research and enhanced contact continued behind the scenes.
Something was going on, but it was being kept top secret. Dr. Hynek's "UFO Report" was published in 1977, but its statistical approach only documented what everyone had already accepted. It failed to throw any light on the real intentions of those behind the phenomenon.
The Celestial Kidnappers
In spite of the Barney and Betty Hill case, it was not until the late seventies and early eighties that there was a real attempt to understand the motives behind the preceding thirty years of peculiar aerial displays.
In 1981, Budd Hopkins published Missing Time. In this book, he investigated seven cases of UFO abduction, each distinguished, as the title suggests, by an unaccountable period of time when nothing could be recalled by the central participants. He was the first to suspect that literally thousands of such abductions were being carried out on a systematic basis. For the first time, he noted that many cases previously thought to be merely visual sighting cases - Close Encounters Of The Third Kind -were actually only the tip of a submerged memory.
It was being discovered for the first time that there were, in fact, "Close Encounters Of The Fourth Kind." These involved not only the sightings of lights in the sky, but close, personal encounters with the flying vehicles and their alien occupants. And these encounters were not simply visual. They involved physical contact with the aliens - involuntary physical contact that amounted to nothing short of kidnapping!
Mr. Hopkins' groundbreaking study showed that, like the Hills, thousands of abductees came away from their experiences with little more than a vague unease and a need for the resolution of conflicting feelings. At the emotional level, they were left with strange, deep-seated fears of certain sights and locations, seemingly for no reason at all. Perhaps they were even able to sense that something awful had happened to them, but that was as far as it went.
Only later and with much counseling were these victims able to say that they had been blocked from remembering a long and horrifying abduction event that had taken place against their will. They were belatedly made aware that they had literally been dragged kicking and screaming into glowing ships that were obviously of unearthly origin. Paralyzed, they often reported being floated into these ships by "antigravity" beams.
Secondly, he discovered that virtually all the UFO abductees he studied had suffered multiple abductions. Usually, these began in childhood (around the age of six or seven) and proceeded on a rather routine basis until the individual reached the age of forty or so. The fact that the abductors continue to hold to this pattern is very important. As we shall later see, it provides an important clue to the reason for their activity. In fact, this thirty-year "window of opportunity" makes a great deal of sense, when seen from an alien perspective. And here, we use the term "alien" loosely. It can easily cover the trans-dimensional beings referred to in the Bible as fallen angels and demons.
Thirdly, all his interviewees reported being subjected to a sort of medical exam. Virtually every abduction includes this regimen. But the more investigators have reviewed these quasi-medical exams, the more they suspect that they aren't really "examinations" at all, at least not in the usual human sense of the word.
Victims are left with sores, visible scars and scoop marks on their bodies. They often suffer from inexplicable pains and unexplainable symptoms of illness. Their misery is often a mixture of both mental and physical complaints. Often, they are simply inconsolable, living in a half-dream world of unresolved conflict. Later, they discover the reason for their distress, that their bodies were used in the most abominable ways.
From the early days of the Hills' experience in the 60's, to current reports, strange "surgeries" are a central part of the abduction experience. More often than not, these involve the bodily organs of reproduction. Using strange probes, clusters of "vacuum needles," and diabolical-appearing instruments, the aliens are preoccupied with obtaining "samples," and implanting their unwilling patients with substances and devices.
Because of their obsession human reproduction, investigators have concluded that some sort of breeding experiment must be central to the "aliens" order of events. But what is it?
The celestial kidnappers continue to operate in mysterious seclusion. Can we discern their motives? More importantly, just what sort of "aliens" are they? Are they really travelers from other planets, here to complete some sort of important work?
Missing Babies
Budd Hopkins' second book, Intruders, published in 1987, focused upon a single case, that of Kathie Davis, a young woman who experienced multiple abductions. His two-and-a-half year study of her life produced a series of disturbing conclusions. To be sure, genetic experimentation was taking place. But it was more than that.
As Hopkins studied her case (and similar cases pertaining to other young women), he was surprised to discover more than missing time. He also discovered what he came to call the "Missing Baby Syndrome."
Kathie and other female abductees were discovering themselves mysteriously pregnant after their UFO experiences. Then, a short time - some weeks to three months later - they would discover that their pregnancies no longer existed. To their horror, they discovered that their fetuses were being harvested by the aliens, and transported away to some unknown location!
Later, during subsequent abductions, their abnormally tiny babies were brought out and presented to them in a strange "bonding" ceremony. The infants appeared to be only partly human. They were tiny by human standards and appeared wan, big-eyed and listless. However, some seemed more human than others.
Hopkins writes, "When Kathie described being shown the tiny, seemingly hybrid baby, she reported a striking new detail: The UFO occupants apparently wanted her to hold the infant so they could observe something about human touch and human emotion. For the moment Kathie's role was that of an instructor; her abductors -as well as the baby - needed something that only she could provide. 'It has something to do with touch, and the human part … they don't understand, but they'll learn.' It occurred to me afterwards that this need for a demonstration of maternal feeling might be the reason why UFO occupants have apparently shown various female abductees their half-human offspring, if that term is even approximately correct."
A Serious Question
Assuming that the experiences of Barney and Betty Hill and Kathie Davis represent factual events, we are forced to answer some questions, or rather, one specific question: Since most students of Bible prophecy believe that we are now living in the latter days - when world conditions are accurately described in Scripture - why don't we see descriptions of these alien abductors there?
As we shall see, there are ranking authorities who attest to the widespread and frequent occurrence of UFO abductions. Furthermore, they assert that these are not random events. There is a pattern and purpose to their actions. They are now a global force. Therefore, we should see them mentioned in Scripture.
The good news is that we do. But in order to recognize them, we must realize that they are lying about who they are.
Does the Bible mention anything at all about latter-day invasions of Earth from other planets or galaxies? It does not. Does the Bible mention anything at all about races of beings who dwell in those faraway places? Again, it does not.
However, it does mention sentient beings, other than humans. Throughout the Bible, in ascending and descending ranks, they are seen, not in the physical realms of this universe, but in another dimension. The natural dwelling-place of these creatures lies beyond the extent of human vision, through the veil of time and space.
Sometimes, as in the books of Job and Revelation, we see them gathered around God's throne. At other times, we see them engaged in specific work, as in the days of Moses in Egypt, when the messenger of death brought his curse upon the firstborn of Egypt. Or, in the days Elijah and Elisha, when they carried the prophet home in a fiery chariot.
They are the angels of heaven, normally invisible to human eyes, but engaged in the work of God, as seen in Daniel 7:9, 10, at the judgment of the nations:
"I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
"A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened."
As these angels go about their God-ordained work , they lie just beyond our world. They are associated with some sort of fiery wheel, evocative of the modern "flying saucer." Apparently, they can see us, but we can't see them. Unless, that is, they momentarily materialize.
On occasion, they deign to assume human form, which they do upon occasion, as with Abraham, in Genesis 18, when "three men" visited him and his wife Sarah. He fed them, and one of them promised Sarah a son. The works of the good angels ring true throughout Scripture, providing perfect models for those who would be God's true servants.
But in Satan's rebellion, a number of them made the supremely bad decision to follow the lawless one. In so doing, they became totally corrupted - the slaves of evil. Led by Satan, their ranking members became "the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation," mentioned in Jude 6. These have been imprisoned, "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgement of the great day."
In other words, says Jude, these once-high beings sinned so grievously that God, Himself imprisoned them for special judgment at the Great White Throne.
But Satan and perhaps millions of his followers are still free to oppose the redemptive work of God.
The Apostle Paul said that they are arranged in ranks, answerable to the devil:
"Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians 6:11,12).
Here, the Christian is warned to be spiritually strong. The devil's schemes are as numerous as they are devious. His servants are here listed as "principalities," called in the Greek, archons. They are the dark angels of high rank who are still free to roam. Totally answerable to Satan, they carry out his plans, acting as his eyes and ears in this dimension.
Next in rank are the "powers," or exousia. They are the delegated authorities of lower order and power.
Finally, we see the "rulers of … darkness," who are called pantokrators. They are the innumerable hoards of demon spirits, foot-soldiers in the army of Satan. Some of them may not be so brilliant, but they are totally dedicated, working to plant evil thoughts, and to possess the minds and hearts of humans, who might otherwise become redeemed to God's purpose.
Ancient Human/Demon Interactions
As we have mentioned before, the ancient pagan peoples of the world viewed the demons as a coexisting race on the face of the planet. They considered them friends, who upon occasion, were even able to bestow blessing upon the fortunate. Offerings were often left out for them.
To them, the demons existed in hazy netherworld, visible to human eyes only when they allowed it. Nevertheless, they were considered real. They were thought to be able to fly, and were often seen in the presence of natural wonders, such as blazing globes of light, and fiery "flying shields."
They were seen as the ghosts of the "great ones" who once lived upon the Earth in the days before the destruction of Atlantis, a great culture brought to an end by a flood-borne cataclysm.
Virtually the entire world has some belief system that includes these demons. In the Orient, they are seen as the unhappy ghosts of ancestors, expressing some dissatisfaction or other. Primitive pagan tribes see them as nature gods. Others have concocted a host of vampires, werewolves, ghosts, goblins, trolls, etc., to explain the presence of demons.
In the British Isles and Europe, they are the fairies and assorted "little people" who dwell in the forests.
But in the last century, the "scientific age" took control of Western thought, and such antiquated beliefs were quickly discarded. However, they were soon replaced by something quite acceptable to the scientific mind: Science fiction, such as that written by Jules Verne and H. G. Welles fueled the public imagination with thoughts of lunar excursions, flights to Mars and trips through time.
At the turn of this century, we began to be visited by strange aerial vehicles of unknown origin that soon enough began to be identified as travelers through space and time. The dirigible-like flying machines seen all over the United States in 1897 became the Martian spaceships of the 1930s and the flying saucers of 1947.
The "little people" had successfully mutated their persona to match the current belief systems; demons had become space travelers. For a while, they were the "little green men." Then, in the sixties (and especially after the Hills' watershed experience), they became the short, thin, big-headed, black-eyed little "grays" that are so much a part of our popular culture.
In his 1969 book, Passport to Magonia, Jacques Vallee documents this very important fact. He writes, "We have now examined several stories of abductions and attempts at kidnappings by the occupants of flying saucers. These episodes are an integral part of the total UFO problem and cannot be solved separately. Historical evidence, gathered by [Walter] Wentz, moreover, once more points in the same direction.
"'This sort of belief in fairies being able to take people was very common and exists yet in a good many parts of West Ireland …
'The Good People [fairies] are often seen there (pointing to Knoch Magh) in great crowds playing hurley and ball. And one often sees among them the young men and women and children who have been taken.'
"Not only are people taken, but - akin flying saucer stories - they are sometimes carried to faraway spots by aerial means."
He quotes Wentz again, who writes, "A man whom I have seen, Roderick MacNeil, was lifted by the hosts [fairies] and left three miles from where he was taken up. The hosts went at about midnight."
These otherworldly creatures, whom we would characterize as demons, manifest themselves in many ways. The subject of many stories on the old sod, they are said to live in a land beyond human vision, called by some, Magonia.
Vallee writes, "The physical nature of Magonia, as it appears in such tales, is quite noteworthy. Sometimes, it is a remote country, an invisible island, some faraway place one can reach only by a long journey. Indeed, in some tales, it is a celestial country … This parallels the belief in the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs, so popular today. A second -and equally widespread - theory, is that Elfland constitutes a sort of parallel universe, which coexists with our own. It is made visible and tangible only to selected people, and the 'doors' that lead through it are tangential points, known only to the elves. This is somewhat analogous to the theory, sometimes found in UFO literature concerning what some authors like to call the 'fourth dimension' - although, of course, this expression makes much less physical sense than does the theory of a parallel Elfland. (It does sound more scientific, however!)"
His point is well taken. The more one studies the ancient phenomenon of an evil world of corrupted spiritual creatures, the more one sees that they are capable of assuming any appearance, as long as it will gain them entrance to the societies of their victims. The author notes that fairies "… take men and women, especially pregnant women or young mothers, and they also are very active in stealing young children. Sometimes, they substitute a false child for the real one, leaving in place of the real child a broom with rugs wrapped around it or one of their children a changeling."
The belief in changelings is ancient, its origins lost in the fog of early history. Basically, it is the belief that demons can carry away a young child, leaving in its place one of their own race, indistinguishable from the original child.
Vallee notes, "A recent television series has capitalized on this aspect of UFO lore. In the show, the human race has been infiltrated by extraterrestrials who differ from humans in small details only. This is not a new idea, as the belief in changelings shows. And there is a well-known passage in Martin Luther's Table Talk, in which he tells the Prince of Anhalt that he should throw in the Moldau [River] a certain man who is, in his opinion, such a changeling - or killcrop, as they were called in Germany."
If a man so renowned as Martin Luther believed that aliens (or demons) could abduct a child and substitute a counterfeit, we must admit that such a belief was widespread among intellectuals in the sixteenth century.
The M.I.T. Conference
A contemporary gathering of intellectuals was convened in a five-day conference at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It began on June 13, 1992, and was co-chaired by M.I.T. physicist David E. Pritchard and Harvard psychiatrist John E. Mack.
A prominent presenter at the conference was Dr. David M. Jacobs, associate professor of history at Temple University. The conference was documented in a 1995 book called, Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind - Alien Abduction, UFOs, and the Conference at M.I.T. It was authored by C.D.B. Bryan.
By way of introduction, he writes, "The central focus of the alien-abduction program is, according to Jacobs, the collection of human eggs and sperm. He, like his mentor the New York artist and abduction-phenomenon authority Budd Hopkins, supports the most sinister explanation for the aliens' presence among us: They are, as Hopkins wrote in his book, Intruders, engaged in 'an ongoing genetic study,' and 'the human species, itself is the subject of a breeding experiment.'
Conference co-chairman John E. Mack had previously written a note of introduction about Jacobs: "The idea that men, women and children can be taken against their wills from their homes, cars and schoolyards by strange, humanoid beings, lifted onto a spacecraft, and subjected to intrusive and threatening procedures is so terrifying, and yet so shattering to our notions of what is possible in our universe, that the actuality of the phenomenon has been largely rejected out of hand or bizarrely distorted in most media accounts. This is altogether understandable, given the disturbing nature of UFO abduction and our prevailing notions of reality.
The fact remains, however, that for thirty years and possibly longer, thousands of individuals who appear to be sincere and of sound mind and who are seeking no personal benefit from their stories have been providing to those who will listen consistent reports of precisely such events. Population surveys suggest that hundreds of thousands, and possibly more than a million, persons in the United States alone may be abductees, or 'experiencers,' as they are sometimes called."
Looking into this phenomenon for the first time, a Christian is likely to have a sense of revulsion, even a discernment of something basically unclean. The procedures being performed upon untold thousands of hapless victims are routinely violated, desecrated and tortured. More than that, they seem to be lasciviously abused.
Investigators note that the first stage of an abduction is a physical examination, as victims are probed, flexed and palpated. Tissue samples are taken without anesthesia. Implants are inserted, also without the benefit of anesthetic. This often involves a small ball-like insert on the end of a thin rod. This is most often inserted into the nose. Victims hear a crunching sound as it penetrates bone, then the long rod is withdrawn. The ball is missing.
These procedures are most often performed by the tiny "grays," but tall beings, carrying an air of authority, are reported as being in charge. These beings can stare into the victim's eyes, and are apparently capable of inducing any emotion or state of mind that they desire, including involuntary sexual arousal, used during their breeding and hybridization procedures.
Bryan writes, "When Mindscan is completed, or sexual arousal is at its peak, Jacobs continues, 'the Tall Being immediately commences a set of gynecological procedures designed to collect and implant eggs, or urological procedures to remove sperm. Women feel that something is put into them. They are told, 'Now you are pregnant.' They wake up the next morning and feel pregnant. They test positive for pregnancy. It doesn't make any sense. Usually, they are abducted again and are told, 'We're taking it out now' or 'It's time now.' They feel that something is being removed from them, that they are no longer pregnant,' Jacobs reports. 'There is very strong anecdotal evidence to support this.'"
The Program
In his 1992 book, Secret Life, Dr. Jacobs utilized scholarly methods to document UFO abduction accounts. In an introductory note, he writes, "This book is based on the testimony of some sixty individuals with whom I have explored more than 300 abduction experiences, and it includes transcripts or accounts of my interviews with more than twenty of them."
In this phenomenon, there is no shortage of subjects. He writes, "An unpublished survey that I conducted of more than 1,200 students at Temple University who answered a written questionnaire suggests that as many as 5.5 percent of them have potentially had abduction experiences. Similarly, study done of 275 respondents to a magazine's survey searching for potential abductees came up with 6 percent. Projecting that number to the population as a whole yields as many as 15 million people in the United States who might have had abduction experiences."
For the last decade and a half, counseling groups have been organized to bring aid and comfort to those who had this unfortunate experience. There are hundreds of such groups, hosting group meetings with thousands. Jacobs' witnesses were taken from all over the U.S., and had no opportunity to consult with each other.
What do the aliens want? Dr. Jacobs concludes that, "… they want to use the ability humans have to recreate themselves. They want human sperm and eggs. They want human physical involvement with the offspring. They want complete knowledge of the reproductive areas of human life. They also want knowledge of our mental and nonreproductive physiological processes. With Mindscan and other mental procedures they might also want knowledge of how humans function within society."
According to Dr. Jacobs' research, however they do not want human advice. They never reveal anything about their true origins or their motivations. They seem to have a fervency of purpose, but no one has yet discerned for sure what it is. They pretend to be from other locations in the universe, but much evidence (such as that presented by Dr. Vallee) suggests that Earth is their home world. Like the good angels, they can remain invisible until it suits their purpose to do otherwise.
Among Dr. Jacobs' close confidants is another highly-respected man, an academic at Harvard University. Dr. John E. Mack, M.D., is a professor of psychiatry at The Cambridge Hospital, Harvard Medical School. He is a man of impeccable credentials.
One should, therefore, sit up and take notice when he publishes a scholarly book, entitled simply, Abduction. Published in 1994, it is subtitled, "Human Encounters with Aliens," and postulates that the Earth is now under a strange threat from an alien force. His book is based upon the study of thirteen of his clients, "none of whose experiences are attributable to mental illness."
His lengthy study concludes in a description of what he calls, "The Hybrid Program." He writes, "The pioneering work of Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs has shown what is amply corroborated in my cases, namely that the abduction phenomenon is in some central way involved in a breeding program that results in the creation of alien/human hybrid offspring.
He writes, "My own impression is that we may be witnessing something far more complex, namely an awkward joining of two species, engineered by an intelligence we are unable to fathom, for a purpose that serves both of our goals with difficulties for each. I base this view on the evidence presented by the abductees themselves."
These electrifying words from a learned man suggest that a superior force is about to take control of our "global village."
This being the case, why don't the aliens simply land on the White House Lawn and take over? Dr. Mack answers this question by saying that in his experience, this isn't the way they think. Of their method, he says, "It is subtler, and its method is to invite, to remind, to permeate our culture from the bottom up as well as the top down, and to open our consciousness in a way that avoids a conclusion, that is different from the ways that we traditionally require. It is an intelligence that provides enough evidence that something profoundly important is at work, but it does not offer the kinds of proof that would satisfy an exclusively empirical, rationalistic way of knowing. It is for us to embrace the reality of the phenomenon and to take a step toward appreciating that we live in a universe different from the one in which we have been taught to believe."
So the question becomes, what reality, then, should we accept? Dr. Mack writes from a secular point of view that assumes no particular spiritual reality. But as a researcher and documentarian he is, nonetheless, acquiring a particular view of universal reality. And it is the aliens that are systematically giving it to him. Dare we suggest that he is the victim of propaganda? We would, in fact, say Satanic propaganda. In the process, he has become far more accepting of the aliens' assumed "program" than have other researchers.
By 1998, when Dr. Jacobs had completed a great deal more study, he published The Threat. The title of his book says it all. He is now totally convinced that the aliens are a dark force among humanity. His work is based upon 700-plus interviews with alien abductees. Also, he references a Roper survey of 6,000 adults. As a tenured associate professor of history at one of the nation's most esteemed universities, his voice carries much weight. His books display a relentless logic and complexity that would require much more space than we have to spare here. Suffice it to say that he powerfully makes his point.
It is important to stress that his perspective is secular, academic and intellectual. He doesn't write with a spiritual view. Christians, however, are forced to analyze his work through the lens of Scripture. His conclusions demand some form of biblical response.
This latest book concludes that the alien threat is fourfold: Abduction, in which victims are selected with great care and secrecy. A Breeding Program, in which aliens, "… collect human sperm and eggs, genetically alter the fertilized embryo, incubate fetuses in human hosts, and make humans mentally and physically interact with the offspring for proper hybrid development."
Following this, there is a Hybridization Program, in which the aliens genetically alter and inbreed humans over generations, giving them a more human appearance.
Finally, there is an Integration Program, apparently to prepare abductees for some future event or events. Dr. Jacobs describes this phase as follows: "Eventually, the hybrids or the aliens themselves integrate into human society and assume control." He observes that some of them have already completed this phase. Apparently, they are undetectable.
Based upon his observations, he concludes that their stunning goal is not far in the future. In other words, he sees them as having almost completed the series of accomplishments necessary to achieve their final expectation.
Will they pull it off? A faithful Christian would say that they won't … at least, not as long as the Holy Spirit and a Spirit-filled people still populate the Earth as a discernible group.
The alien plan involves a soon-coming transformation in the culture of our world. They refer to it as "The Change," often giving their victims the impression that it will suddenly come around the turn of the Millennium. One of the abductees was told that it would happen "around 1999." Another was told that it would be, "Very, very soon." Still another was informed that, "… there will be no necessity to continue national governments. There will be 'one system' and 'one goal.'"
Every Christian should find such terminology quite familiar! Students of Bible prophecy have been talking about such an event for many years. We are well familiar with a global government led by the Son Of Perdition.
A Quick Look Back
As we and others have often pointed out, the UFO phenomenon has evolved through many forms since its initial "coming-out" in Kenneth Arnold's 1947 sighting of "flying saucers."
In the 1950s, there were a rash of cheap books and movies, with the theme, "flying saucers have landed." There were contacts with "Venusians," "Martians" and "invisible beings from the center of the Earth." Contactees like George Adamski, George Van Tassel, Truman Bethurum and Gray Barker established a kind of "kookiness," that debunked the phenomenon. At the same time, public consciousness of it continued to grow, as it does to this day.
Van Tassel published a magazine called, "The Proceedings of the College of Universal Wisdom." Bethurum's, "Aboard a Flying Saucer," told of meetings with a beautiful Venusian spaceship captain. Barker's, "They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers," is a UFO-paranoia piece that tells about missing researchers who got too close to the truth. In 1962, Barker wrote the introduction and epilogue to Albert K. Bender's famous "Flying Saucers and the Three Men," perhaps the groundbreaking book on the infamous "Men In Black."
The flaky fifties gave way to the solidifying sixties. Observed cases became less fleeting and more substantial. Daylight Disks and Nocturnal Lights gave way to the proliferation of UFO landing cases. Perhaps the most famous example of this phenomenon was the case of New Mexico highway patrolman Lonnie Zamora.
In 1964, he spotted an egg-shaped craft with extended landing legs. It disappeared behind a hill. He quickly drove to the spot, where he sighted in on the ground. Two small "men" were apparently inspecting its exterior.
When he arrived, they quickly boarded and took off in a burst of flame. Their machine left distinct landing pad marks and chemical traces. Such sightings set the tone of human/UFO contact, until the event that changed all parameters: The Barney and Betty Hill abduction.
The Propaganda Machine
To use the old phrase, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that, in this century, humanity has been subjected to a propaganda parade. From 1947 to the present, UFO aliens have presented themselves as everything from Martians and Venusians to Tau Cetians to Alpha Pegasians. As twentieth-century perceptions have shifted, their identities have shifted to meet current social expectations.
At the dawn of our atomic age, they said they were here to save mankind from a hideous extinction by fire and radiation.
With the birth of the environmental movement, they suddenly told their victims that they were here to save mankind from climatic catastrophe.
These days, they present no excuse. They simply go about the work that has apparently underlain their comings and goings for many years.
It appears that they are engaged in the sorry business of stealing the human birthright. Such work is intrinsically impure, base and immoral. What they can't create, they are most willing to corrupt.
They have done it before, and according to the words of the Lord, Himself, they will try do it again.
Who are they? They are the master propagandists: the fallen angels and their demonic followers. Over the centuries of man's existence, they have posed as various demigods, superhumans, human-animal aberrations, fish-gods, forest-gods, tree-gods, bird-gods, etc. They are willing to take on any form that will be accepted by the society of the day.
Now, they are "spacemen," come here to save mankind. But, in reality, they are dark overlords in the service of Satan, come forth to corrupt mankind, producing a race of pseudo-humans who can represent them in this dimension.
They did it before, as described in Genesis 6:4-6:
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
"And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."
Commentators too numerous to mention have seen in this passage the miserable story of a humanity corrupted by dark forces of spiritual wickedness in the heavens. They broke God's law by descending into this dimension to mate with humans, producing a mutant race called, "giants." These were the nephilim, Hebrew for "the fallen ones."
They were unclean and genetically corrupt creatures whose total preoccupation was evil in all imaginable forms. God determined that they were irredeemable; they had to be destroyed.
"But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God" (Genesis 6:8, 9).
Quite simply, the righteous Noah and his family had escaped the filth dumped upon mankind by the intruders from on high. Noah was generationally (genealogically and genetically) perfect. The Lord brought him through the judgment flood to start a new race. Our Lord prophesied that this horrifying scenario would break forth once again … in the latter days:
"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
"For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
"And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Matthew 24:36-39).
Here, Jesus is clearly speaking of future judgment, the Tribulation, Second Coming and certain events that will surround it.
He says that His coming will happen at a time when social conditions will resemble those that plagued the world in the days of Noah. From Genesis 6, we know discern that these will include an invasion of dark forces from the heavens.
Is it premature to say that this has already begun to happen? And if so, does it not tell us that end-time events are very, very close?
The UFO abduction phenomenon is only a mask for fallen angels who have departed from their natural domain to engage in the filthy work of creating an alternate race that will act as their proxies.
UFO researchers deduce that they are trying to genetically produce versions of themselves that will be able to function in this environment. But this doesn't logically fit what we know to be true about mankind.
Man was created by God, not aliens from outer space. Satan attempted to thwart God's redemptive purpose in the Garden of Eden. Later, his servants succeed in corrupting very nearly the entire race.
Satan, the liar, is recognizable in the lying activities of the "space brothers" and their UFOs. First they claim to be one thing, then another. But all along, their motive is to destroy humanity before it can be redeemed by God. Satan has many servants.
As Jesus told the Pharisees, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it" (John 8:44).
The devil's chief method is the lie. In the current UFO abduction activity, we can recognize it once again. Hybrid human/aliens are nothing more or less than the corrupt progeny of the fallen angelic host. For over 5,000 years, their method has not changed.
Now, as then, they pry into the forbidden areas of human procreation. Lascivious and power hungry, they seek to set up their own race, and their own province of control.
But only in the last fifty years have their activities acquired a speed and purpose that tells us what time it is, prophetically speaking. Jesus told us, in effect, that when we begin to see such things come to pass, His appearance would not be far behind.
Now, as never before, we must be watchful, and attentive to that momentous event. The program of the Antichrist is almost in place.
By Gary Stearman
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Gaza Strip Operation To Be Expanded
Less than a week after leaving the Khan Younis area following an operation to apprehend wanted suspects and locate tunnels used for the smuggling of weapons, the IDF is planning another, broader operation in the Gaza Strip, to be launched in the coming days.
"We can't hold on to areas in the Strip for an extended period of time, but we must act all the more forcefully against the terror infrastructures," army officials told Ynet, adding that "an expansion of the operation in Gaza is expected soon."
During the war in Lebanon, the IDF's activity in Gaza has decreased. With the conclusion of the fighting in the north and the return of the forces to the south, operations were renewed and further ones are expected to be carried out deep in Palestinian territory.
IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz and Defense Minister Amir Peretz were recently presented with the plans for the new operations and approved them. Peretz, who visited the Gaza Division's southern brigade last week, hinted then that no large-scale operation is in the cards at this point, and that the army will not take control over areas in the Strip, but only perform pinpoint operations.
A senior army official explained the objective of the operations: "The Gaza Strip appears relatively quiet, except for a few Qassam attacks each day, but under the surface the motivation of the terror groups to carry out attacks remained very high. This reinforcement, which is demonstrated by the smuggling of large amounts of arms, isn't very evident now, but may become extremely visible in the future, and this needs to be stopped."
Troubling scenarios
The operations are being planned against the backdrop of several troubling scenarios the Southern Command is concerned about, including a terror attack in an Israeli community located close to the Gaza border, to which terrorists will infiltrate through a tunnel.
The official also referred to alarming reports that Hamas in gaining in strength and said that, "We must not ignore what is happening in the Strip… we have to act until we see an internal change there. At the moment, such a change is not in sight."
Data presented by the IDF regarding its achievements in a series of operations since the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, indicate that some 300 terrorists were killed, hundreds were injured, and dozens of structures, warehouses and terror infrastructure bombarded.
According to plans, the IDF will expand the forays into Gaza and stay in the Strip for short periods of time. Military sources admitted that the broadening of operations will also lead to an increase in resistance on the part of the terror organizations, which may use innovative weapons similar to those employed by Hizbullah in Lebanon.
Y Net News
10.31.2006
"We can't hold on to areas in the Strip for an extended period of time, but we must act all the more forcefully against the terror infrastructures," army officials told Ynet, adding that "an expansion of the operation in Gaza is expected soon."
During the war in Lebanon, the IDF's activity in Gaza has decreased. With the conclusion of the fighting in the north and the return of the forces to the south, operations were renewed and further ones are expected to be carried out deep in Palestinian territory.
IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz and Defense Minister Amir Peretz were recently presented with the plans for the new operations and approved them. Peretz, who visited the Gaza Division's southern brigade last week, hinted then that no large-scale operation is in the cards at this point, and that the army will not take control over areas in the Strip, but only perform pinpoint operations.
A senior army official explained the objective of the operations: "The Gaza Strip appears relatively quiet, except for a few Qassam attacks each day, but under the surface the motivation of the terror groups to carry out attacks remained very high. This reinforcement, which is demonstrated by the smuggling of large amounts of arms, isn't very evident now, but may become extremely visible in the future, and this needs to be stopped."
Troubling scenarios
The operations are being planned against the backdrop of several troubling scenarios the Southern Command is concerned about, including a terror attack in an Israeli community located close to the Gaza border, to which terrorists will infiltrate through a tunnel.
The official also referred to alarming reports that Hamas in gaining in strength and said that, "We must not ignore what is happening in the Strip… we have to act until we see an internal change there. At the moment, such a change is not in sight."
Data presented by the IDF regarding its achievements in a series of operations since the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, indicate that some 300 terrorists were killed, hundreds were injured, and dozens of structures, warehouses and terror infrastructure bombarded.
According to plans, the IDF will expand the forays into Gaza and stay in the Strip for short periods of time. Military sources admitted that the broadening of operations will also lead to an increase in resistance on the part of the terror organizations, which may use innovative weapons similar to those employed by Hizbullah in Lebanon.
Y Net News
10.31.2006
Monday, October 30, 2006
Condi Comes Clean On Her Middle East Views
Editor's note: There's been much speculation in recent days about Secretary of State Rice's beliefs on the future of "peace" in Israel and the areas won in defensive wars. JWR contributing columnist columnist Cal Thomas interviewed Miss Rice on October 25. What follows is an exclusive excerpt of the interview that will appear next week in his syndicated column.
We think the Secretary of State comes off as utopian and rather naive. She needs to go.
QUESTION: You're all over the conservative Jewish blogs for remarks you made recently on the Palestinian state, your commitment to it, living side by side with Israel, and that's been the policy of the Administration since day one.
SECRETARY RICE: Yes.
QUESTION: I'd like to know what evidence you have — I read, and I know you do and a lot more than I do, the sermons, the editorials in the Middle East, the right of return idea, which a lot of people think is just basically overwhelming for a Jewish population with millions and millions of Arabs in the so-called Diaspora. What evidence do you have that teaching their schoolchildren at the ages of four and five to be martyrs, to show up in their little uniforms with plastic guns and their headbands, textbooks one grenade plus two grenades equals, you know, three grenades — what evidence do you have out there that if they had an independent state that they would lay down their arms and not complete the mission of killing the Jews and throwing them out?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, you can look at any opinion poll in the Palestinian territories and 70 percent of the people will say they're perfectly ready to live side by side with Israel because they just want to live in peace. And when it comes right down to it, yeah, there are plenty of extremists in the Palestinian territories who are not going to be easily dealt with. They have to be dealt with — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories — they're terrorists and they have to be dealt with as terrorists.
But the great majority of Palestinian people — this is — I've been with these people. The great majority of people, they just want a better life. This is an educated population. I mean, they have a kind of culture of education and a culture of civil society. I just don't believe mothers want their children to grow up to be suicide bombers. I think the mothers want their children to grow up to go to university. And if you can create the right conditions, that's what people are going to do.
QUESTION: Do you think this or do you know this?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, I think I know it.
QUESTION: You think you know it?
SECRETARY RICE: I think I know it.
QUESTION: Is it because — do you think you know it because you want to believe it or do you think you know it because of conversations with tens, scores, hundreds —
SECRETARY RICE: Well, lots of conversations with Palestinians. But also it's — look, if human beings don't want a better future, don't want their children to grow up in peace and have opportunities, then none of this is going to work anyway. But I really believe that the people of the Middle East — not the extremists — want the same things that everyone else wants. I haven't seen a society yet where it wasn't true. Let me put it that way. I haven't seen a society yet where ordinary people, given an opportunity, wouldn't opt for a better life and for peace.
QUESTION: But then you have this incredible religious component which says, you know, your guarantee for heaven is if you blow somebody up.
SECRETARY RICE: Yeah, except for those leaders who don't seem to be so anxious to lead the surge and go to paradise.
QUESTION: Oh, of course they don't. No, they have plenty of recruits.
SECRETARY RICE: Yeah, they do have plenty of recruits. But the ideology, that kind of ideology of hatred and hopelessness does not have a chance against an ideology of hope and a better future. We just have to realize that because of the way that the politics of the Middle East has developed for the last 60 years, that ideology of hope and a better future has not been there.
I don't believe that most people in the Middle East really want to blow themselves up and believe in this ideology any more than most Russians actually wanted to believe in international communism. There are always extremists who are going to do that. There are always ideologues who are going to believe and they are always going to recruit from a pool of disaffected people. So you both have to lessen the pool of disaffected people, give them alternatives, and people choose other paths. I just don't see a society yet where that hasn't been the case.
Jewish World Review
10.30.2006
We think the Secretary of State comes off as utopian and rather naive. She needs to go.
QUESTION: You're all over the conservative Jewish blogs for remarks you made recently on the Palestinian state, your commitment to it, living side by side with Israel, and that's been the policy of the Administration since day one.
SECRETARY RICE: Yes.
QUESTION: I'd like to know what evidence you have — I read, and I know you do and a lot more than I do, the sermons, the editorials in the Middle East, the right of return idea, which a lot of people think is just basically overwhelming for a Jewish population with millions and millions of Arabs in the so-called Diaspora. What evidence do you have that teaching their schoolchildren at the ages of four and five to be martyrs, to show up in their little uniforms with plastic guns and their headbands, textbooks one grenade plus two grenades equals, you know, three grenades — what evidence do you have out there that if they had an independent state that they would lay down their arms and not complete the mission of killing the Jews and throwing them out?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, you can look at any opinion poll in the Palestinian territories and 70 percent of the people will say they're perfectly ready to live side by side with Israel because they just want to live in peace. And when it comes right down to it, yeah, there are plenty of extremists in the Palestinian territories who are not going to be easily dealt with. They have to be dealt with — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories — they're terrorists and they have to be dealt with as terrorists.
But the great majority of Palestinian people — this is — I've been with these people. The great majority of people, they just want a better life. This is an educated population. I mean, they have a kind of culture of education and a culture of civil society. I just don't believe mothers want their children to grow up to be suicide bombers. I think the mothers want their children to grow up to go to university. And if you can create the right conditions, that's what people are going to do.
QUESTION: Do you think this or do you know this?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, I think I know it.
QUESTION: You think you know it?
SECRETARY RICE: I think I know it.
QUESTION: Is it because — do you think you know it because you want to believe it or do you think you know it because of conversations with tens, scores, hundreds —
SECRETARY RICE: Well, lots of conversations with Palestinians. But also it's — look, if human beings don't want a better future, don't want their children to grow up in peace and have opportunities, then none of this is going to work anyway. But I really believe that the people of the Middle East — not the extremists — want the same things that everyone else wants. I haven't seen a society yet where it wasn't true. Let me put it that way. I haven't seen a society yet where ordinary people, given an opportunity, wouldn't opt for a better life and for peace.
QUESTION: But then you have this incredible religious component which says, you know, your guarantee for heaven is if you blow somebody up.
SECRETARY RICE: Yeah, except for those leaders who don't seem to be so anxious to lead the surge and go to paradise.
QUESTION: Oh, of course they don't. No, they have plenty of recruits.
SECRETARY RICE: Yeah, they do have plenty of recruits. But the ideology, that kind of ideology of hatred and hopelessness does not have a chance against an ideology of hope and a better future. We just have to realize that because of the way that the politics of the Middle East has developed for the last 60 years, that ideology of hope and a better future has not been there.
I don't believe that most people in the Middle East really want to blow themselves up and believe in this ideology any more than most Russians actually wanted to believe in international communism. There are always extremists who are going to do that. There are always ideologues who are going to believe and they are always going to recruit from a pool of disaffected people. So you both have to lessen the pool of disaffected people, give them alternatives, and people choose other paths. I just don't see a society yet where that hasn't been the case.
Jewish World Review
10.30.2006
Sunday, October 29, 2006
The Death Of Common Sense
Today we mourn the passing of an old friend by the name of Common Sense. No one really knows how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He selflessly devoted his life to service in schools, hospitals, homes, factories and offices, helping folks get jobs done without fanfare and foolishness. For decades, petty rules, silly laws and frivolous lawsuits held no power over Common Sense. He was credited with cultivating such valued lessons as: to know when to come in out of the rain, the early bird gets the worm, and life isn't always fair.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn), reliable parenting strategies (adults are in charge, not kids), and adages such as "it's okay to come in second." A veteran of the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, and the Technological Revolution, Common Sense survived cultural and educational trends including feminism, body piercing, whole language and "new math."
But his health declined when he became infected with the "if-it-only-helps-one-person-it's-worth-it" virus. In recent decades his waning strength proved no match for the ravages of overbearing federal regulation. He watched in pain as good people became ruled by self-seeking lawyers and enlightened auditors. His health rapidly deteriorated when schools endlessly implemented zero-tolerance policies, reports made of six-year-old boys charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate, a teen suspended for taking a swig of mouthwash after lunch, and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student. His health declined even further when schools had to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student but cannot inform the parent when the female student is pregnant or wants an abortion. Finally, Common Sense lost his will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses, criminals received better treatment than victims, and federal judges stuck their noses in everything from Boy Scouts to professional sports.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers: Rights, Tolerance and Whiner. Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn), reliable parenting strategies (adults are in charge, not kids), and adages such as "it's okay to come in second." A veteran of the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, and the Technological Revolution, Common Sense survived cultural and educational trends including feminism, body piercing, whole language and "new math."
But his health declined when he became infected with the "if-it-only-helps-one-person-it's-worth-it" virus. In recent decades his waning strength proved no match for the ravages of overbearing federal regulation. He watched in pain as good people became ruled by self-seeking lawyers and enlightened auditors. His health rapidly deteriorated when schools endlessly implemented zero-tolerance policies, reports made of six-year-old boys charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate, a teen suspended for taking a swig of mouthwash after lunch, and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student. His health declined even further when schools had to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student but cannot inform the parent when the female student is pregnant or wants an abortion. Finally, Common Sense lost his will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses, criminals received better treatment than victims, and federal judges stuck their noses in everything from Boy Scouts to professional sports.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers: Rights, Tolerance and Whiner. Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Wanted: A Strategy
The bad news is that Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman, who has little relevant experience and radically anti-democratic ideas, has been tapped as minister in charge of "strategic threats." The good news is that he has no decision-making power over the realm over which he has supposedly been put in charge.
The worst news, however, is that Lieberman's appointment is itself a measure of the disdain and lack of seriousness with which our government approaches the critical task of developing a national strategy toward real strategic threats.
One might think, given our casual approach to strategic planning, that we are a country untroubled by any particular threats. We have become so used to confronting threats in an ad-hoc and piecemeal way that this is considered normal. It is a form of "normality" that should be jettisoned.
A cursory survey reveals five major, interlocking threats facing us as a nation: Iran, the Arab world, the Palestinians, the global jihad against the West, and demographic trends within the Jewish people. The first four threats share a common denominator: they are founded in Muslim opposition to non-Muslim sovereignty and power, as manifest in a refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state. The last threat feeds into the other four in that it weakens us as a people, thereby encouraging those who wish to destroy us.
Roughly speaking, Israel has pursued three strategies toward Muslim opposition to Jewish sovereignty: peace through strength (1948-1993), land for peace (1993-2003) and unilateralism (2003-?).
This taxonomy is not a hard and fast one - elements of each strategy were employed throughout our history. The peace with Egypt was built upon the withdrawal from Sinai, and Israel has always maintained relatively high defense spending and the belief that the IDF is the ultimate guarantor of our security. Even the line between the Oslo Accords period and Ariel Sharon's unilateral approach is not as sharp as it may seem, since the Israeli decision to ignore Palestinian non-implementation of the accords amounted to a form of unilateralism.
None of these approaches failed completely; we are here and much more firmly established than a few decades ago. But none has succeeded, either. Each generation has yearned that the next will not have to devote so much blood and treasure to sustain what most other countries take for granted. Each generation has been disappointed.
The creation of a new ministerial portfolio for strategic planning does not reduce by one iota the responsibilities of the prime, defense, and foreign ministers to develop a systematic response to national threats. We hope the new office can contribute to such a process - at the very least to highlight the need for one.
Rarely has there been such a combination of a heightened threat and a policy vacuum as exists at this moment. The unilateral withdrawal agenda that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert campaigned for during the most recent elections, and subsequently through Western capitals, is now off the table for the foreseeable future.
None of the three basic strategies that Israel has pursued in the past can alone be taken as a model for the future. In addition, none of them really reflects the post-9/11 world, in which the "Arab-Israeli" conflict has been subsumed within a wider conflict between radical Islamism and the West.
A good start would be for our government to begin to explain to the world that the usual model, of a "regional conflict" that can be simply resolved through the creation of a Palestinian state, ignores the root cause of the problem. Though most Israelis now believe that a Palestinian state should be part of the solution, the problem is not the absence of such a state, but the absence of an Arab acceptance of Israel that would allow such a state's creation.
Our leaders need to explain that what we face is just a more virulent and persistent form of what the entire West faces: a radical Islamist attempt to intimidate and subdue any nation that stands in the way of its totalitarian theocratic ideology. There could not have been a better illustration of this than the war we just fought against an axis of radical regimes and movements: Iran, Syria, Hizb'allah and Hamas. A new strategy begins with recognizing this ourselves, and saying so to the world.
Jerusalem Post
10.28.2006
The worst news, however, is that Lieberman's appointment is itself a measure of the disdain and lack of seriousness with which our government approaches the critical task of developing a national strategy toward real strategic threats.
One might think, given our casual approach to strategic planning, that we are a country untroubled by any particular threats. We have become so used to confronting threats in an ad-hoc and piecemeal way that this is considered normal. It is a form of "normality" that should be jettisoned.
A cursory survey reveals five major, interlocking threats facing us as a nation: Iran, the Arab world, the Palestinians, the global jihad against the West, and demographic trends within the Jewish people. The first four threats share a common denominator: they are founded in Muslim opposition to non-Muslim sovereignty and power, as manifest in a refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state. The last threat feeds into the other four in that it weakens us as a people, thereby encouraging those who wish to destroy us.
Roughly speaking, Israel has pursued three strategies toward Muslim opposition to Jewish sovereignty: peace through strength (1948-1993), land for peace (1993-2003) and unilateralism (2003-?).
This taxonomy is not a hard and fast one - elements of each strategy were employed throughout our history. The peace with Egypt was built upon the withdrawal from Sinai, and Israel has always maintained relatively high defense spending and the belief that the IDF is the ultimate guarantor of our security. Even the line between the Oslo Accords period and Ariel Sharon's unilateral approach is not as sharp as it may seem, since the Israeli decision to ignore Palestinian non-implementation of the accords amounted to a form of unilateralism.
None of these approaches failed completely; we are here and much more firmly established than a few decades ago. But none has succeeded, either. Each generation has yearned that the next will not have to devote so much blood and treasure to sustain what most other countries take for granted. Each generation has been disappointed.
The creation of a new ministerial portfolio for strategic planning does not reduce by one iota the responsibilities of the prime, defense, and foreign ministers to develop a systematic response to national threats. We hope the new office can contribute to such a process - at the very least to highlight the need for one.
Rarely has there been such a combination of a heightened threat and a policy vacuum as exists at this moment. The unilateral withdrawal agenda that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert campaigned for during the most recent elections, and subsequently through Western capitals, is now off the table for the foreseeable future.
None of the three basic strategies that Israel has pursued in the past can alone be taken as a model for the future. In addition, none of them really reflects the post-9/11 world, in which the "Arab-Israeli" conflict has been subsumed within a wider conflict between radical Islamism and the West.
A good start would be for our government to begin to explain to the world that the usual model, of a "regional conflict" that can be simply resolved through the creation of a Palestinian state, ignores the root cause of the problem. Though most Israelis now believe that a Palestinian state should be part of the solution, the problem is not the absence of such a state, but the absence of an Arab acceptance of Israel that would allow such a state's creation.
Our leaders need to explain that what we face is just a more virulent and persistent form of what the entire West faces: a radical Islamist attempt to intimidate and subdue any nation that stands in the way of its totalitarian theocratic ideology. There could not have been a better illustration of this than the war we just fought against an axis of radical regimes and movements: Iran, Syria, Hizb'allah and Hamas. A new strategy begins with recognizing this ourselves, and saying so to the world.
Jerusalem Post
10.28.2006
Friday, October 27, 2006
The Dark Ages — Live From The Middle East!
The most frightening aspect of the present war is how easily our pre-modern enemies from the Middle East have brought a stunned postmodern world back into the Dark Ages.
Students of history are sickened when they read of the long-ago, gruesome practice of beheading. How brutal were those societies that chopped off the heads of Cicero, Sir Thomas More and Marie Antoinette. And how lucky we thought we were to have evolved from such elemental barbarity.
Twenty-four hundred years ago, Socrates was executed for unpopular speech. The 18th-century European Enlightenment gave people freedom to express views formerly censored by clerics and the state. Just imagine what life was like once upon a time when no one could write music, compose fiction or paint without court or church approval?
Ancient Greek literary characters, from Lysistrata to Antigone, reflected the struggle for sexual equality. The subsequent notion that women could vote, divorce, dress or marry as they pleased was a millennia-long struggle.
It is almost surreal now to read about the elemental hatred of Jews in the Spanish Inquisition, 19th-century Russian pogroms or the Holocaust. Yet here we are revisiting the old horrors of the savage past.
Beheading? As we saw with Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, our Neanderthal enemies in the Middle East have resurrected that ancient barbarity — and married it with 21st-century technology to beam the resulting gore instantaneously onto our computer screens. Xerxes and Attila, who stuck their victims' heads on poles for public display, would've been thrilled by such a gruesome show.
Who would have thought centuries after the Enlightenment that sophisticated Europeans — in fear of radical Islamists — would be afraid to write a novel, put on an opera, draw a cartoon, film a documentary or have their pope discuss comparative theology?
The astonishing fact is not just that millions of women worldwide in 2006 are still veiled from head-to-toe, trapped in arranged marriages, subject to polygamy, honor killings and forced circumcision, or are without the right to vote or appear alone in public. What is more baffling is that in the West, liberal Europeans are often wary of protecting female citizens from the excesses of Sharia law — sometimes even fearful of asking women to unveil their faces for purposes of simple identification and official conversation.
Who these days is shocked that Israel is hated by Arab nations and threatened with annihilation by radical Iran? Instead, the surprise is that even in places like Paris or Seattle, Jews are singled out and killed for the apparent crime of being Jewish.
Since Sept. 11, the West has fought enemies who are determined to bring back the nightmarish world that we thought was long past. And there are lessons Westerners can learn from radical Islamists' ghastly efforts.
First, the Western liberal tradition is fragile and can still disappear. Just because we have sophisticated cell phones, CAT scanners and jets does not ensure that we are permanently civilized or safe. Technology used by the civilized for positive purposes can easily be manipulated by barbarians for destruction.
Second, the Enlightenment is not always lost on the battlefield. It can be surrendered through either fear or indifference as well. Westerners fearful of terrorist reprisals themselves shut down a production of a Mozart opera in Berlin deemed offensive to Muslims. Few came to the aid of a Salman Rushdie or Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh when their unpopular expression earned death threats from Islamists. Van Gogh, of course, was ultimately killed.
The Goths and Vandals did not sack Rome solely through the power of their hordes; they also relied on the paralysis of Roman elites who no longer knew what it was to be Roman — much less whether it was any better than the alternative.
Third, civilization is forfeited with a whimper, not a bang. Insidiously, we have allowed radical Islamists to redefine the primordial into the not-so-bad. Perhaps women in head-to-toe burkas in Europe prefer them? Maybe that crass German opera was just too over the top after all? Aren't both parties equally to blame in the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan wars?
To grasp the flavor of our own Civil War, impersonators now don period dress and reconstruct the battles of Shiloh or Gettysburg. But we need no so such historical reenactment of the Dark Ages. You see, they are back with us — live almost daily from the Middle East.
Jewish World Review
10.27.2006
Students of history are sickened when they read of the long-ago, gruesome practice of beheading. How brutal were those societies that chopped off the heads of Cicero, Sir Thomas More and Marie Antoinette. And how lucky we thought we were to have evolved from such elemental barbarity.
Twenty-four hundred years ago, Socrates was executed for unpopular speech. The 18th-century European Enlightenment gave people freedom to express views formerly censored by clerics and the state. Just imagine what life was like once upon a time when no one could write music, compose fiction or paint without court or church approval?
Ancient Greek literary characters, from Lysistrata to Antigone, reflected the struggle for sexual equality. The subsequent notion that women could vote, divorce, dress or marry as they pleased was a millennia-long struggle.
It is almost surreal now to read about the elemental hatred of Jews in the Spanish Inquisition, 19th-century Russian pogroms or the Holocaust. Yet here we are revisiting the old horrors of the savage past.
Beheading? As we saw with Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, our Neanderthal enemies in the Middle East have resurrected that ancient barbarity — and married it with 21st-century technology to beam the resulting gore instantaneously onto our computer screens. Xerxes and Attila, who stuck their victims' heads on poles for public display, would've been thrilled by such a gruesome show.
Who would have thought centuries after the Enlightenment that sophisticated Europeans — in fear of radical Islamists — would be afraid to write a novel, put on an opera, draw a cartoon, film a documentary or have their pope discuss comparative theology?
The astonishing fact is not just that millions of women worldwide in 2006 are still veiled from head-to-toe, trapped in arranged marriages, subject to polygamy, honor killings and forced circumcision, or are without the right to vote or appear alone in public. What is more baffling is that in the West, liberal Europeans are often wary of protecting female citizens from the excesses of Sharia law — sometimes even fearful of asking women to unveil their faces for purposes of simple identification and official conversation.
Who these days is shocked that Israel is hated by Arab nations and threatened with annihilation by radical Iran? Instead, the surprise is that even in places like Paris or Seattle, Jews are singled out and killed for the apparent crime of being Jewish.
Since Sept. 11, the West has fought enemies who are determined to bring back the nightmarish world that we thought was long past. And there are lessons Westerners can learn from radical Islamists' ghastly efforts.
First, the Western liberal tradition is fragile and can still disappear. Just because we have sophisticated cell phones, CAT scanners and jets does not ensure that we are permanently civilized or safe. Technology used by the civilized for positive purposes can easily be manipulated by barbarians for destruction.
Second, the Enlightenment is not always lost on the battlefield. It can be surrendered through either fear or indifference as well. Westerners fearful of terrorist reprisals themselves shut down a production of a Mozart opera in Berlin deemed offensive to Muslims. Few came to the aid of a Salman Rushdie or Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh when their unpopular expression earned death threats from Islamists. Van Gogh, of course, was ultimately killed.
The Goths and Vandals did not sack Rome solely through the power of their hordes; they also relied on the paralysis of Roman elites who no longer knew what it was to be Roman — much less whether it was any better than the alternative.
Third, civilization is forfeited with a whimper, not a bang. Insidiously, we have allowed radical Islamists to redefine the primordial into the not-so-bad. Perhaps women in head-to-toe burkas in Europe prefer them? Maybe that crass German opera was just too over the top after all? Aren't both parties equally to blame in the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan wars?
To grasp the flavor of our own Civil War, impersonators now don period dress and reconstruct the battles of Shiloh or Gettysburg. But we need no so such historical reenactment of the Dark Ages. You see, they are back with us — live almost daily from the Middle East.
Jewish World Review
10.27.2006
The Dark Ages — Live From The Middle East!
The most frightening aspect of the present war is how easily our pre-modern enemies from the Middle East have brought a stunned postmodern world back into the Dark Ages.
Students of history are sickened when they read of the long-ago, gruesome practice of beheading. How brutal were those societies that chopped off the heads of Cicero, Sir Thomas More and Marie Antoinette. And how lucky we thought we were to have evolved from such elemental barbarity.
Twenty-four hundred years ago, Socrates was executed for unpopular speech. The 18th-century European Enlightenment gave people freedom to express views formerly censored by clerics and the state. Just imagine what life was like once upon a time when no one could write music, compose fiction or paint without court or church approval?
Ancient Greek literary characters, from Lysistrata to Antigone, reflected the struggle for sexual equality. The subsequent notion that women could vote, divorce, dress or marry as they pleased was a millennia-long struggle.
It is almost surreal now to read about the elemental hatred of Jews in the Spanish Inquisition, 19th-century Russian pogroms or the Holocaust. Yet here we are revisiting the old horrors of the savage past.
Beheading? As we saw with Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, our Neanderthal enemies in the Middle East have resurrected that ancient barbarity — and married it with 21st-century technology to beam the resulting gore instantaneously onto our computer screens. Xerxes and Attila, who stuck their victims' heads on poles for public display, would've been thrilled by such a gruesome show.
Who would have thought centuries after the Enlightenment that sophisticated Europeans — in fear of radical Islamists — would be afraid to write a novel, put on an opera, draw a cartoon, film a documentary or have their pope discuss comparative theology?
The astonishing fact is not just that millions of women worldwide in 2006 are still veiled from head-to-toe, trapped in arranged marriages, subject to polygamy, honor killings and forced circumcision, or are without the right to vote or appear alone in public. What is more baffling is that in the West, liberal Europeans are often wary of protecting female citizens from the excesses of Sharia law — sometimes even fearful of asking women to unveil their faces for purposes of simple identification and official conversation.
Who these days is shocked that Israel is hated by Arab nations and threatened with annihilation by radical Iran? Instead, the surprise is that even in places like Paris or Seattle, Jews are singled out and killed for the apparent crime of being Jewish.
Since Sept. 11, the West has fought enemies who are determined to bring back the nightmarish world that we thought was long past. And there are lessons Westerners can learn from radical Islamists' ghastly efforts.
First, the Western liberal tradition is fragile and can still disappear. Just because we have sophisticated cell phones, CAT scanners and jets does not ensure that we are permanently civilized or safe. Technology used by the civilized for positive purposes can easily be manipulated by barbarians for destruction.
Second, the Enlightenment is not always lost on the battlefield. It can be surrendered through either fear or indifference as well. Westerners fearful of terrorist reprisals themselves shut down a production of a Mozart opera in Berlin deemed offensive to Muslims. Few came to the aid of a Salman Rushdie or Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh when their unpopular expression earned death threats from Islamists. Van Gogh, of course, was ultimately killed.
The Goths and Vandals did not sack Rome solely through the power of their hordes; they also relied on the paralysis of Roman elites who no longer knew what it was to be Roman — much less whether it was any better than the alternative.
Third, civilization is forfeited with a whimper, not a bang. Insidiously, we have allowed radical Islamists to redefine the primordial into the not-so-bad. Perhaps women in head-to-toe burkas in Europe prefer them? Maybe that crass German opera was just too over the top after all? Aren't both parties equally to blame in the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan wars?
To grasp the flavor of our own Civil War, impersonators now don period dress and reconstruct the battles of Shiloh or Gettysburg. But we need no so such historical reenactment of the Dark Ages. You see, they are back with us — live almost daily from the Middle East.
Jewish World Review
10.27.2006
Students of history are sickened when they read of the long-ago, gruesome practice of beheading. How brutal were those societies that chopped off the heads of Cicero, Sir Thomas More and Marie Antoinette. And how lucky we thought we were to have evolved from such elemental barbarity.
Twenty-four hundred years ago, Socrates was executed for unpopular speech. The 18th-century European Enlightenment gave people freedom to express views formerly censored by clerics and the state. Just imagine what life was like once upon a time when no one could write music, compose fiction or paint without court or church approval?
Ancient Greek literary characters, from Lysistrata to Antigone, reflected the struggle for sexual equality. The subsequent notion that women could vote, divorce, dress or marry as they pleased was a millennia-long struggle.
It is almost surreal now to read about the elemental hatred of Jews in the Spanish Inquisition, 19th-century Russian pogroms or the Holocaust. Yet here we are revisiting the old horrors of the savage past.
Beheading? As we saw with Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, our Neanderthal enemies in the Middle East have resurrected that ancient barbarity — and married it with 21st-century technology to beam the resulting gore instantaneously onto our computer screens. Xerxes and Attila, who stuck their victims' heads on poles for public display, would've been thrilled by such a gruesome show.
Who would have thought centuries after the Enlightenment that sophisticated Europeans — in fear of radical Islamists — would be afraid to write a novel, put on an opera, draw a cartoon, film a documentary or have their pope discuss comparative theology?
The astonishing fact is not just that millions of women worldwide in 2006 are still veiled from head-to-toe, trapped in arranged marriages, subject to polygamy, honor killings and forced circumcision, or are without the right to vote or appear alone in public. What is more baffling is that in the West, liberal Europeans are often wary of protecting female citizens from the excesses of Sharia law — sometimes even fearful of asking women to unveil their faces for purposes of simple identification and official conversation.
Who these days is shocked that Israel is hated by Arab nations and threatened with annihilation by radical Iran? Instead, the surprise is that even in places like Paris or Seattle, Jews are singled out and killed for the apparent crime of being Jewish.
Since Sept. 11, the West has fought enemies who are determined to bring back the nightmarish world that we thought was long past. And there are lessons Westerners can learn from radical Islamists' ghastly efforts.
First, the Western liberal tradition is fragile and can still disappear. Just because we have sophisticated cell phones, CAT scanners and jets does not ensure that we are permanently civilized or safe. Technology used by the civilized for positive purposes can easily be manipulated by barbarians for destruction.
Second, the Enlightenment is not always lost on the battlefield. It can be surrendered through either fear or indifference as well. Westerners fearful of terrorist reprisals themselves shut down a production of a Mozart opera in Berlin deemed offensive to Muslims. Few came to the aid of a Salman Rushdie or Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh when their unpopular expression earned death threats from Islamists. Van Gogh, of course, was ultimately killed.
The Goths and Vandals did not sack Rome solely through the power of their hordes; they also relied on the paralysis of Roman elites who no longer knew what it was to be Roman — much less whether it was any better than the alternative.
Third, civilization is forfeited with a whimper, not a bang. Insidiously, we have allowed radical Islamists to redefine the primordial into the not-so-bad. Perhaps women in head-to-toe burkas in Europe prefer them? Maybe that crass German opera was just too over the top after all? Aren't both parties equally to blame in the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan wars?
To grasp the flavor of our own Civil War, impersonators now don period dress and reconstruct the battles of Shiloh or Gettysburg. But we need no so such historical reenactment of the Dark Ages. You see, they are back with us — live almost daily from the Middle East.
Jewish World Review
10.27.2006
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Russia’s Vladimir Putin Makes Insults To Israel’s Leaders
In a televised phone-in Wednesday, Oct. 25, Putin offered the view that the sex scandal surrounding President Katzav and the corruption charges against PM Olmert were provoked by “Israel’s actions in the Lebanon.” He added: “Many see the events as defeat. That immediately triggered attacks against the president, the prime minister and the chief of staff.”
Putin’s words are seen as a gratuitous and unprecedented affront to Israeli leaders and a breach of normal courtesies between governments.
During a joint Kremlin appearance with Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert two weeks ago, the Russian president was caught on microphone coarsely commenting: “Say hello to your president – he really surprised us.” Later he claimed he thought the microphones had been switched off. But reporters quoted him as adding a further off-color comment: "We did not know he knew how to deal with 10 women.”
The Russian president’s follow-up remarks Wednesday, Oct. 25, suggest his earlier comments were meant to be heard. They also reflect negative fallout from the Putin-Olmert talks in Moscow.
DEBKAfile’s Moscow sources report that the Russian president felt Olmert had misrepresented the outcome of their Kremlin talks when he informed his cabinet that they had reached complete understanding on the Iranian nuclear question and agreement to coordinate security aspects. But Putin became angry when the Israeli prime minister contradicted a statement by Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov to the Kuwaiti news agency on Oct. 20. Referring to the Iranian nuclear issue, Lavrov said Russia would oppose any attempts to penalize Iran through the UN Security Council or take the nuclear program as a pretext to topple the Iranian regime.
On Oct. 22, Olmert, challenged by his ministers about the Lavrov interview, replied: “I heard quite different things from Putin.”
The Russian president has now made it clear that he will not put up with contradictions of his positions or those of his foreign minister by the Israeli prime minister or anyone else.
Debka
10.26.2006
Putin’s words are seen as a gratuitous and unprecedented affront to Israeli leaders and a breach of normal courtesies between governments.
During a joint Kremlin appearance with Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert two weeks ago, the Russian president was caught on microphone coarsely commenting: “Say hello to your president – he really surprised us.” Later he claimed he thought the microphones had been switched off. But reporters quoted him as adding a further off-color comment: "We did not know he knew how to deal with 10 women.”
The Russian president’s follow-up remarks Wednesday, Oct. 25, suggest his earlier comments were meant to be heard. They also reflect negative fallout from the Putin-Olmert talks in Moscow.
DEBKAfile’s Moscow sources report that the Russian president felt Olmert had misrepresented the outcome of their Kremlin talks when he informed his cabinet that they had reached complete understanding on the Iranian nuclear question and agreement to coordinate security aspects. But Putin became angry when the Israeli prime minister contradicted a statement by Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov to the Kuwaiti news agency on Oct. 20. Referring to the Iranian nuclear issue, Lavrov said Russia would oppose any attempts to penalize Iran through the UN Security Council or take the nuclear program as a pretext to topple the Iranian regime.
On Oct. 22, Olmert, challenged by his ministers about the Lavrov interview, replied: “I heard quite different things from Putin.”
The Russian president has now made it clear that he will not put up with contradictions of his positions or those of his foreign minister by the Israeli prime minister or anyone else.
Debka
10.26.2006
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Muslims: Jews Have Big Ears
Israeli humanitarian aid activist describes reactions of Muslims she helped after telling them she was from Israel.
When (former) Sri Lankan prime minister Mahinda Rajapaksa saw a Star of David on Gal Lusky's t-shirt, he initially refused to meet with her. After hours of arguments, Rajapaksa agreed to privately meet with Lusky, of the Israel Flying Aid organization (IFA), which delivered much needed help to the Sri Lankan people after the 2004 tsunami disaster.
"I know you Israelis from three angles," Rajapaksa told Lusky. "From CNN, the point of view of Yasser Arafat, and as corrupt weapons dealers. Which one are you?" he asked.
Lusky asked the prime minister to stop "wasting her time with preconceived notions," and by the end of the hour-long meeting, Rajapksa insisted she stay, saying he did not want her to leave.
The account of the meeting, and the work of the IFA in Muslim countries afflicted by disaster, was recounted by Lusky in a packed Knesset session Tuesday morning, held to mark the beginning of Jewish Social Action month of Cheshvan.
Lusky showed photographs of a smiling Pakistani Islamic underground member wearing a t-shirt with an Israeli flag on it, after he saw the weeks of work and aid carried out by IFA members in Pakistan. "He knew the danger, and he still wanted to wear it," Lusky said. After helping children in Indonesia, Lusky said she came across a child drawing pictures of war.
"Why are you drawing these things?" She asked the child. "Because I am scared of the Jews. They are dangerous and they have big ears and teeth," the Indonesian child answered. He added that he had been taught to fear the Jews at his mosque. Without revealing her identity, Lusky asked the child if he knew where the Jewish country was. "It's right here, just across the sea," the child said.
On IFA's final day of work in Indonesia, during which the organization was forced to call itself the "International Flying Aid" organization to disguise its Israeli identity, Lusky addressed the people she had spent weeks helping in the local mosque, and told them she was "from the country of the Jews."
"How many of you would come to Tel Aviv in Israel to help me if we had an earthquake?" Lusky asked the audience. "All of the children raised their hands and shouted that they would come to help, while the adults didn't know what to do," she recounted.
'Light to all nations'
Knesset Member Reuven Rivlin said he wanted to "see the State of Israel as a light to all nations, Jews and non-Jews." He emphasized that much charity work needed to be done in Israel itself.
Knesset Member Zevulun Orlev said that according to Jewish law, "all poor people were equal," adding that he wanted to see Israeli families in need of aid to receive help on an equal basis. Orlev described charity work as "sanctifying God's name."
"Except for Israel, there is a large-scale physical assimilation going on in Jewish communities, in some cases up to 80 percent are assimilating," Orlev said. "We need to keep Jews in their nation," he added.
'Knesset Members not setting personal example'
Knesset Members appeared unnerved by the comments of 17 year-old Yehuda Asael, of the National Youth Student Council, who placed the spotlight on the conduct of Knesset Members, and asked how their personal example fit in with the values of righteousness and charity.
"We as students are not very interested in the news, but we occasionally watch these programs, and we see many criminal cases attached to Knesset Members themselves. We look at you, Knesset Members, as you say, let's hold a month of charity, but we ask, what about you? Are you setting a good personal example?" Asael asked.
Rivlin retorted: "You live in a democratic state. Some Knesset Members are excellent; they are the pride of the nation. They created a strong country that can defend every Jew who returns to his homeland. Don't harm the arena of democracy. Always remember that the Knesset is larger than its members."
Speaking to Ynetnews, Asael said the Knesset needed to rid itself of unsavory elements. "They said I was generalizing, but that's not exactly accurate. There are problems here of personal example. I hope Knesset Members expel the problematic elements from their ranks," he said.
Y Net News
10.25.2006
When (former) Sri Lankan prime minister Mahinda Rajapaksa saw a Star of David on Gal Lusky's t-shirt, he initially refused to meet with her. After hours of arguments, Rajapaksa agreed to privately meet with Lusky, of the Israel Flying Aid organization (IFA), which delivered much needed help to the Sri Lankan people after the 2004 tsunami disaster.
"I know you Israelis from three angles," Rajapaksa told Lusky. "From CNN, the point of view of Yasser Arafat, and as corrupt weapons dealers. Which one are you?" he asked.
Lusky asked the prime minister to stop "wasting her time with preconceived notions," and by the end of the hour-long meeting, Rajapksa insisted she stay, saying he did not want her to leave.
The account of the meeting, and the work of the IFA in Muslim countries afflicted by disaster, was recounted by Lusky in a packed Knesset session Tuesday morning, held to mark the beginning of Jewish Social Action month of Cheshvan.
Lusky showed photographs of a smiling Pakistani Islamic underground member wearing a t-shirt with an Israeli flag on it, after he saw the weeks of work and aid carried out by IFA members in Pakistan. "He knew the danger, and he still wanted to wear it," Lusky said. After helping children in Indonesia, Lusky said she came across a child drawing pictures of war.
"Why are you drawing these things?" She asked the child. "Because I am scared of the Jews. They are dangerous and they have big ears and teeth," the Indonesian child answered. He added that he had been taught to fear the Jews at his mosque. Without revealing her identity, Lusky asked the child if he knew where the Jewish country was. "It's right here, just across the sea," the child said.
On IFA's final day of work in Indonesia, during which the organization was forced to call itself the "International Flying Aid" organization to disguise its Israeli identity, Lusky addressed the people she had spent weeks helping in the local mosque, and told them she was "from the country of the Jews."
"How many of you would come to Tel Aviv in Israel to help me if we had an earthquake?" Lusky asked the audience. "All of the children raised their hands and shouted that they would come to help, while the adults didn't know what to do," she recounted.
'Light to all nations'
Knesset Member Reuven Rivlin said he wanted to "see the State of Israel as a light to all nations, Jews and non-Jews." He emphasized that much charity work needed to be done in Israel itself.
Knesset Member Zevulun Orlev said that according to Jewish law, "all poor people were equal," adding that he wanted to see Israeli families in need of aid to receive help on an equal basis. Orlev described charity work as "sanctifying God's name."
"Except for Israel, there is a large-scale physical assimilation going on in Jewish communities, in some cases up to 80 percent are assimilating," Orlev said. "We need to keep Jews in their nation," he added.
'Knesset Members not setting personal example'
Knesset Members appeared unnerved by the comments of 17 year-old Yehuda Asael, of the National Youth Student Council, who placed the spotlight on the conduct of Knesset Members, and asked how their personal example fit in with the values of righteousness and charity.
"We as students are not very interested in the news, but we occasionally watch these programs, and we see many criminal cases attached to Knesset Members themselves. We look at you, Knesset Members, as you say, let's hold a month of charity, but we ask, what about you? Are you setting a good personal example?" Asael asked.
Rivlin retorted: "You live in a democratic state. Some Knesset Members are excellent; they are the pride of the nation. They created a strong country that can defend every Jew who returns to his homeland. Don't harm the arena of democracy. Always remember that the Knesset is larger than its members."
Speaking to Ynetnews, Asael said the Knesset needed to rid itself of unsavory elements. "They said I was generalizing, but that's not exactly accurate. There are problems here of personal example. I hope Knesset Members expel the problematic elements from their ranks," he said.
Y Net News
10.25.2006
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
High Priestess Of The Palestinian State
If the State Department has a religion, it’s Palestinian statehood. On its altar, diplomats are eager to sacrifice the security of America’s only reliable Middle East ally and, ultimately, our own security as well.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has become the high priestess of this cult – muttering mystic incantations about Palestinian suffering under the brutal Israeli occupation and how a Palestinian state would be the crowning achievement of American foreign policy, much the way the Munich pact was the Olympic gold of British diplomacy.
Her recent address to the American Palestine Task Force was modestly described by the Zionist Organization of America as the “most pro-Palestinian Arab, anti-Israel speech in memory by a major U.S. administration official.”
In her remarks, Rice confessed, “I believe that there could be no greater legacy for America than to help bring into being a Palestinian state for a people who” suffer the “daily humiliation.” of living under the so-called Israeli occupation.
This is the way our secretary of state chooses to characterize the nation that has been our steadfast friend for 60 years (brutal occupying power), to demonstrate her devotion for a people who celebrated the slaughter of 3,000 Americans on 9/11 by dancing in the streets of Ramallah.
As a student of history, Rice observed, I know that “there are so many things that once seemed impossible that, after they happened, simply seemed inevitable.” She wasn’t talking about the improbable rise of Nazism in Germany, which would be an apt comparison here.
Scholar that she is, Rice had another political movement in mind, “By all rights, America, the United States of America (in case her audience thought she was referring to another America), should never have come into being,” the lady declared.
To compare Washington, Adams and Jefferson to Arafat, Abbas and the mad bombers of Hamas is kinky, to say the least. Our Founding Fathers were men of learning, achievement and discernment, not a gang of Allah-intoxicated savages. They demonstrated their courage by pledging their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, not by turning mothers and children into smoldering lumps of mangled flesh.
“The Palestinian people deserve a better life, a life that is rooted in liberty, democracy, uncompromised by violence and terrorism,” Rice inanely proclaimed.
What the French are to cuisine and collaboration, the Palestinians are to violence and terrorism.
In January of this year, the Palestinians gave Hamas control of their legislature. It’s not that the rival gang (Fatah) isn’t also a terrorist entity. It’s just that Hamas is more bloodthirsty and fanatical – good things in the eyes of the worthy Palestinian people. Gary Bauer summarized the election’s outcome with the observation, “Faced with a choice, the Palestinian voters picked the most ardent and committed Jew-haters and America-haters.”
In recent opinion polls, 61 percent of Palestinians supported suicide bombings and terrorism, 56 percent favored rocket attacks on civilian targets, 75 percent endorsed the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers (which sparked a mini-war on Israel’s northern border in July and August), and 97 percent were pro-Hezbollah.
Palestinian tastes run to Protocols-of-Elders-of-Zion-type anti-Semitism, “honor killing” of women suspected of adultery, the brutal murder of Israeli civilians, and the sectarian-cleansing of Nazareth and Bethlehem, once overwhelmingly Christian cities.
In the aftermath of Pope Benedict XVI’s speech at a Bavarian university, which included a quote by a 14th century Byzantine emperor, the state-run television station of the Palestinian Authority described the pontiff as “arrogant,” “stupid,” and “criminal.” The pope will be judged by Allah on the day “when eyes stare in terror,” the jihad network predicted.
Hey, the Palestinians need a symbol for their state, right – like Uncle Sam for the U.S. or John Bull for the Brits? How about the mother of a suicide bomber decked out in fashionable black robes describing her pride and pleasure that her martyr son did Allah’s will by detonating himself along with as many innocents as possible?
Rice could look far and wide and not find worse candidates for creating a nation where democracy, tolerance, and pluralism will reign than the Palestinians.
But Condi is more than a ditzy cheerleader for Palestinian nationalism. She’s also a facilitator par excellence. A year ago, Ms. Rice brokered the deal to hand Gaza over to the terrorists, which entailed 7,500 Jews being driven from their homes.
It wasn’t long before the Minutemen of the Middle East were expressing their gratitude for this by rocket attacks on Israel’s southern settlements (45 in September alone).
Rice pressured Israel into turning over checkpoints on the Gaza/Sinai border to a joint force of Palestinians and Egyptians. Since then, Palestinian terrorists (excuse the redundancy) have smuggled 15 tons of explosives over the border, as well as quantities of rifles, ammunition, rockets and other weapons and munitions. Condi must be very popular with Israelis just a rocket’s shot from Gaza.
Now she wants the U.S. to fund an expansion of Abbas’s Presidential Guard from 2,500 to 6,000 troops. She also wants Israel to approve the transfer of additional weapons to the ironically misnamed Palestinian security forces. Toys for Terrorists?
If Condoleezza Rice has a favorite Palestinian, it’s Mahmoud Abbas, president of the “Palestinian Authority.”
In the fantasy realm Rice has constructed, Abbas is the moderate working feverishly for democracy and human rights in Jihadistan, as well as for an enduring peace with Israel. Good Abbas and his noble Fatah party are contrasted with the terrorist black hats of Hamas.
On her Middle East trip earlier this month, Rice told reporters she had “great admiration” for the president of the Palestinians, and praised his “willingness” to restart negotiations with the Israelis (so gracious of him).
“You have the strong commitment of the United States to that cause and the personal commitment of me,” the secretary of state simpered.
Palestine’s George Washington was Arafat’s chief deputy for 40 years and helped him to found Fatah. Abbas was paymaster for the Munich Olympics assassins. His Ph.D. thesis on why the Holocaust never happened reads like David Duke’s memoirs.
Abbas’s party, Fatah, was the undisputed master of the Palestinian Authority until January, when it lost the aforementioned legislative elections to Hamas. (It still controls the presidency.) Fatah and Hamas are rival gangs – like the Capone mob and Bugs Moran’s boys – engaged in a turf war. One is more religious, the other more ideological. Otherwise, there’s no difference..
Both are anti-American. Both seek the destruction of Israel. Both are willing to wade through a river of blood to reach their goals. Both envision a Palestinian state which will resemble a hybrid of Syria and Iran – without the amenities.
There’s an assiduously cultivated myth that unlike Hamas, Abbas recognizes Israel. Abbas has made it quite clear that he recognizes his Israeli counterparts for purposes of negotiations (when he thinks he can get something) – not Israel’s legitimacy or claim to any territory.
The charter of Abbas’ party calls for the annihilation of Israel. Maps of the Palestinian Authority show Palestine from the Jordan to the sea. In a 2004 interview on Iranian television, then PA Foreign Minister Farouk Kaddoumi said Fatah’s embrace of a two-state solution was a feint. “At this stage, there will be two states. Many years from now, there will be one state.”
Abu Ahmed, a leader of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades (Fatah’s terrorist auxiliary) is frank: “The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Aco. There has been no change in our position (vis a vis the Zionist entity). Abbas recognizes Israel because of the pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him. We understand this is part of his obligations and political calculations.” It’s an act to get the dumb Americans to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into the Palestinian Authority and pressure Jerusalem into giving in to his latest demand.
The Brigades are responsible for every suicide bombing inside Israel in the last two years. Rice’s State Department considers the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades a terrorist group. Members of the Brigades are members of Fatah. It was started by Arafat. When they overran Fatah headquarters in 2003, the Israelis discovered documentation that the party had recently transferred $50,000 to the Brigades. With the Brigades, Abbas can have it both ways – playing the sober, business-suited diplomat for the West, while acting as the terrorist chieftain for his own people.
Abbas has authorized the payment of annuities to the families of suicide bombers. Of both Hamas and the Brigades, Rice’s favorite Palestinian politician says, “Israel calls them terrorists, we call them strugglers.” Also, “Allah loves the martyr.” Suicide bombers should be recognized as “heroes fighting for freedom.” He’s also praised the Islamic lunatics of Hezbollah as a shining example of what he calls the “Arab resistance.”
A year ago, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began raving about wiping Israel off the face of the earth, Abbas’s party in Gaza distributed flyers proclaiming, “We affirm our support and backing for the positions of the Iranian president toward the Zionist state which, by God’s will, will cease to exist.”
By the will of Allah – and with the unwitting support of Condoleezza Rice.
In her speech to the American Palestinian Task Force, Rice described Palestinian statehood as the impossible dream that we must dare to dream nonetheless.
It’s more like the inevitable nightmare. Everyone wants it. Its boosters include Tony Blair, the European Union, the UN, Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush, the Saudis, the Arab League, the Conference of Islamic Organizations, al Qaeda, Iranian mullahs, Bashar Assad, etc., etc. At least half of Israel, including the Olmert government, is willing to go along with it.
The two-state solution is a one-state solution in disguise.
With a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza, Israel will lose strategic depth. It will be 9 miles wide at its narrow waist. It will lose the high ground of Judea and Samaria. Most of its population and industry will be within mortar- and rocket- range. Instead of a 40-mile eastern border, its new border with the State of Palestine will be over 400 miles long.
For their future security, Israelis will have to trust in the good will of Mahmoud Abbas, the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, Hamas and al-Qaeda (which is already operating in Gaza). Apologies to the M*A*S*H theme song, but this suicide will not be painless.
Who knows, perhaps Abbas and company will erect a statue of Secretary Rice (their Marquis de Lafayette) in the future Palestinian state – just after they demolish the Knesset and Western wall, turn Yad Vashem into a mosque and drive the Jews into the sea.
Frontpage
Kisses From Condi
Push to undermine AIPAC aids possible U.S. tilt toward Palestinians, not peace. Reports coming from Israeli military and intelligence sources lately all agree: Trouble is brewing in Gaza, where the Hamas-run government has presided over an unprecedented buildup of arms.
After more than a year of pinpricks by Gaza-based terrorists firing primitive Kassam rockets into southern Israel, Hamas may be ready for a new escalation of violence. Indeed, the talk of them trying to emulate Hezbollah's "victory" in Lebanon is rampant.
American and European sanctions on the Palestinian Authority, which have sought to isolate the Hamas government elected in January, have not prompted Palestinians to draw the correct conclusion from events. Driven by a political culture and an educational system that places the highest value on the eradication of Israel, the P.A., whether it is led by Hamas or the supposedly more moderate Fatah Party of President Mahmoud Abbas, appears incapable of making peace.
Under these circumstances, advocates in Israel of further territorial withdrawals are quiet. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, elected less than seven months ago on a platform whose chief plank was a pullout from much of the West Bank, is now silent on the issue. The proposal is, at least for the foreseeable future, as dead as a door nail.
END-AROUND LEFT FLANK
What then should Americans who care about Israel do? According to some on the political left, the answer is to push for pressure on the United States to to jump-start the non-existent chances for peace.
That's right, some of our leading lights think all we need to do is to go back to the old failed formula of support for Palestinian "moderates" and pressure on Israel to be more forthcoming.
Rather than focus on the obvious disinterest of the Palestinians in peace and the need to bolster Israel as it recovers from the recent Lebanon war, some of us have chosen a more accessible culprit than Hamas: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known as AIPAC.
They were at pains to avoid the charge of competing with the lobby, which represents an across-the-board alliance of Jewish groups dedicated to support of the U.S.-Israel alliance. But there was little question that an end-around the left flank of AIPAC was the purpose of reported meetings of financiers and activists.
Emboldened by the ability of an ad-hoc grouping of left-wing groups that challenged AIPAC during the congressional debate over sanctions on the Hamas-run P.A., the idea of forming a new group whose purpose would be to mobilize support for a more "activist" policy than that contemplated by AIPAC seems to be very much on the minds of some activists.
Raising alarms for some observers is that a principal funder of the proposed new group would be financier George Soros. The idea that the billionaire's first major gift to a Jewish group would be one aimed at undermining AIPAC seems to speak more of his previous support for far-left causes such as the MoveOn.org group than of a new commitment to the security of Israel.
AIPAC's success in cultivating the leadership of Congress in the last decade has also led to anger on the part of some liberals because that meant making nice with Republicans.
Yet the critique of AIPAC seems to center on the idea that it is "right-wing" because of its efforts to highlight Palestinian intransigence. That's a trifle ironic given AIPAC's history of supporting the policies of Israeli governments that veered left. Contrary to the gripes of some, the group was an enthusiastic backer of the Oslo fiasco, and was similarly supportive of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.
Opponents of the legislation penalizing the Palestinians for putting their government in the hands of terrorists mocked the bills supporters as trying to be more Zionist than the Israelis. But given the dormant nature of the Israeli left these days, the idea that AIPAC critics are more representative of Israeli positions than the supposedly out-of-touch "right" is a joke.
We could dismiss this latest maneuver as just meaningless Jewish politics were it not for an alarming development within the Bush administration that ought to be raising alarms among friends of Israel.
Following her recent failed mission to the region to bolster support for non-existent Palestinian moderates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice further confused the situation with an Oct. 11 speech in Washington to the American Task Force on Palestine, a pro-Arab group.
Though the theme of the presentation was supposedly to reinforce Palestinian moderates against Hamas, Rice failed to send a clear message that America would not tolerate further escalation of the conflict. Rice downplayed the threat from Hamas, and chose instead to pretend that this clear failure for the administration's democracy promotion project that their election victory represented was still a good idea.
A NEW WAY TO DEFINE 'SUPPORT'
Even worse, the secretary gave in to the impulse to rhetorical overkill, and wound up implicitly comparing the Palestinian nationalism to America's founding fathers and the U.S. civil rights movement. Reminders of the fate of other groups — such as the Kurds — who have been told to make do without an independent state rather than the American revolution would have been more useful.
When combined with further pledges of aid to a group that seems bent on renewed war, Rice's over-the-top talk could encourage the Palestinian leadership to think that Bush might be backing away from Israel. History shows that many a war has been launched by just such a diplomatic misjudgment.
When combined with other rumors floating around Washington about the supposed comeback of former Secretary of State James Baker (now part of a task force examining the Iraq war) to influence, the notion that this is the moment for Jewish supporters of Israel to be pushing the administration to ratchet up the pressure on Israel isn't just ill-timed, it's nuts.
Support for Israel does not require anyone to be unquestioning fans of AIPAC or unthinking cheerleaders for any Israeli government. But with Hamas spoiling for a fight to distract Palestinians from their misrule, U.S. calls to loosen up Israeli security measures at checkpoints or to release terror suspects would be a dangerous mistake.
What Palestinians need are not hugs and kisses from Condi Rice, but frank talk about what they stand to lose if they continue on their present path.
And just because some Americans are frustrated with the stalemate does not entitle us to encourage a push for concessions that can only lead to more bloodshed.
Jewish World Review
10.24.2006
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has become the high priestess of this cult – muttering mystic incantations about Palestinian suffering under the brutal Israeli occupation and how a Palestinian state would be the crowning achievement of American foreign policy, much the way the Munich pact was the Olympic gold of British diplomacy.
Her recent address to the American Palestine Task Force was modestly described by the Zionist Organization of America as the “most pro-Palestinian Arab, anti-Israel speech in memory by a major U.S. administration official.”
In her remarks, Rice confessed, “I believe that there could be no greater legacy for America than to help bring into being a Palestinian state for a people who” suffer the “daily humiliation.” of living under the so-called Israeli occupation.
This is the way our secretary of state chooses to characterize the nation that has been our steadfast friend for 60 years (brutal occupying power), to demonstrate her devotion for a people who celebrated the slaughter of 3,000 Americans on 9/11 by dancing in the streets of Ramallah.
As a student of history, Rice observed, I know that “there are so many things that once seemed impossible that, after they happened, simply seemed inevitable.” She wasn’t talking about the improbable rise of Nazism in Germany, which would be an apt comparison here.
Scholar that she is, Rice had another political movement in mind, “By all rights, America, the United States of America (in case her audience thought she was referring to another America), should never have come into being,” the lady declared.
To compare Washington, Adams and Jefferson to Arafat, Abbas and the mad bombers of Hamas is kinky, to say the least. Our Founding Fathers were men of learning, achievement and discernment, not a gang of Allah-intoxicated savages. They demonstrated their courage by pledging their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, not by turning mothers and children into smoldering lumps of mangled flesh.
“The Palestinian people deserve a better life, a life that is rooted in liberty, democracy, uncompromised by violence and terrorism,” Rice inanely proclaimed.
What the French are to cuisine and collaboration, the Palestinians are to violence and terrorism.
In January of this year, the Palestinians gave Hamas control of their legislature. It’s not that the rival gang (Fatah) isn’t also a terrorist entity. It’s just that Hamas is more bloodthirsty and fanatical – good things in the eyes of the worthy Palestinian people. Gary Bauer summarized the election’s outcome with the observation, “Faced with a choice, the Palestinian voters picked the most ardent and committed Jew-haters and America-haters.”
In recent opinion polls, 61 percent of Palestinians supported suicide bombings and terrorism, 56 percent favored rocket attacks on civilian targets, 75 percent endorsed the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers (which sparked a mini-war on Israel’s northern border in July and August), and 97 percent were pro-Hezbollah.
Palestinian tastes run to Protocols-of-Elders-of-Zion-type anti-Semitism, “honor killing” of women suspected of adultery, the brutal murder of Israeli civilians, and the sectarian-cleansing of Nazareth and Bethlehem, once overwhelmingly Christian cities.
In the aftermath of Pope Benedict XVI’s speech at a Bavarian university, which included a quote by a 14th century Byzantine emperor, the state-run television station of the Palestinian Authority described the pontiff as “arrogant,” “stupid,” and “criminal.” The pope will be judged by Allah on the day “when eyes stare in terror,” the jihad network predicted.
Hey, the Palestinians need a symbol for their state, right – like Uncle Sam for the U.S. or John Bull for the Brits? How about the mother of a suicide bomber decked out in fashionable black robes describing her pride and pleasure that her martyr son did Allah’s will by detonating himself along with as many innocents as possible?
Rice could look far and wide and not find worse candidates for creating a nation where democracy, tolerance, and pluralism will reign than the Palestinians.
But Condi is more than a ditzy cheerleader for Palestinian nationalism. She’s also a facilitator par excellence. A year ago, Ms. Rice brokered the deal to hand Gaza over to the terrorists, which entailed 7,500 Jews being driven from their homes.
It wasn’t long before the Minutemen of the Middle East were expressing their gratitude for this by rocket attacks on Israel’s southern settlements (45 in September alone).
Rice pressured Israel into turning over checkpoints on the Gaza/Sinai border to a joint force of Palestinians and Egyptians. Since then, Palestinian terrorists (excuse the redundancy) have smuggled 15 tons of explosives over the border, as well as quantities of rifles, ammunition, rockets and other weapons and munitions. Condi must be very popular with Israelis just a rocket’s shot from Gaza.
Now she wants the U.S. to fund an expansion of Abbas’s Presidential Guard from 2,500 to 6,000 troops. She also wants Israel to approve the transfer of additional weapons to the ironically misnamed Palestinian security forces. Toys for Terrorists?
If Condoleezza Rice has a favorite Palestinian, it’s Mahmoud Abbas, president of the “Palestinian Authority.”
In the fantasy realm Rice has constructed, Abbas is the moderate working feverishly for democracy and human rights in Jihadistan, as well as for an enduring peace with Israel. Good Abbas and his noble Fatah party are contrasted with the terrorist black hats of Hamas.
On her Middle East trip earlier this month, Rice told reporters she had “great admiration” for the president of the Palestinians, and praised his “willingness” to restart negotiations with the Israelis (so gracious of him).
“You have the strong commitment of the United States to that cause and the personal commitment of me,” the secretary of state simpered.
Palestine’s George Washington was Arafat’s chief deputy for 40 years and helped him to found Fatah. Abbas was paymaster for the Munich Olympics assassins. His Ph.D. thesis on why the Holocaust never happened reads like David Duke’s memoirs.
Abbas’s party, Fatah, was the undisputed master of the Palestinian Authority until January, when it lost the aforementioned legislative elections to Hamas. (It still controls the presidency.) Fatah and Hamas are rival gangs – like the Capone mob and Bugs Moran’s boys – engaged in a turf war. One is more religious, the other more ideological. Otherwise, there’s no difference..
Both are anti-American. Both seek the destruction of Israel. Both are willing to wade through a river of blood to reach their goals. Both envision a Palestinian state which will resemble a hybrid of Syria and Iran – without the amenities.
There’s an assiduously cultivated myth that unlike Hamas, Abbas recognizes Israel. Abbas has made it quite clear that he recognizes his Israeli counterparts for purposes of negotiations (when he thinks he can get something) – not Israel’s legitimacy or claim to any territory.
The charter of Abbas’ party calls for the annihilation of Israel. Maps of the Palestinian Authority show Palestine from the Jordan to the sea. In a 2004 interview on Iranian television, then PA Foreign Minister Farouk Kaddoumi said Fatah’s embrace of a two-state solution was a feint. “At this stage, there will be two states. Many years from now, there will be one state.”
Abu Ahmed, a leader of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades (Fatah’s terrorist auxiliary) is frank: “The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Aco. There has been no change in our position (vis a vis the Zionist entity). Abbas recognizes Israel because of the pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him. We understand this is part of his obligations and political calculations.” It’s an act to get the dumb Americans to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into the Palestinian Authority and pressure Jerusalem into giving in to his latest demand.
The Brigades are responsible for every suicide bombing inside Israel in the last two years. Rice’s State Department considers the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades a terrorist group. Members of the Brigades are members of Fatah. It was started by Arafat. When they overran Fatah headquarters in 2003, the Israelis discovered documentation that the party had recently transferred $50,000 to the Brigades. With the Brigades, Abbas can have it both ways – playing the sober, business-suited diplomat for the West, while acting as the terrorist chieftain for his own people.
Abbas has authorized the payment of annuities to the families of suicide bombers. Of both Hamas and the Brigades, Rice’s favorite Palestinian politician says, “Israel calls them terrorists, we call them strugglers.” Also, “Allah loves the martyr.” Suicide bombers should be recognized as “heroes fighting for freedom.” He’s also praised the Islamic lunatics of Hezbollah as a shining example of what he calls the “Arab resistance.”
A year ago, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began raving about wiping Israel off the face of the earth, Abbas’s party in Gaza distributed flyers proclaiming, “We affirm our support and backing for the positions of the Iranian president toward the Zionist state which, by God’s will, will cease to exist.”
By the will of Allah – and with the unwitting support of Condoleezza Rice.
In her speech to the American Palestinian Task Force, Rice described Palestinian statehood as the impossible dream that we must dare to dream nonetheless.
It’s more like the inevitable nightmare. Everyone wants it. Its boosters include Tony Blair, the European Union, the UN, Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush, the Saudis, the Arab League, the Conference of Islamic Organizations, al Qaeda, Iranian mullahs, Bashar Assad, etc., etc. At least half of Israel, including the Olmert government, is willing to go along with it.
The two-state solution is a one-state solution in disguise.
With a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza, Israel will lose strategic depth. It will be 9 miles wide at its narrow waist. It will lose the high ground of Judea and Samaria. Most of its population and industry will be within mortar- and rocket- range. Instead of a 40-mile eastern border, its new border with the State of Palestine will be over 400 miles long.
For their future security, Israelis will have to trust in the good will of Mahmoud Abbas, the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, Hamas and al-Qaeda (which is already operating in Gaza). Apologies to the M*A*S*H theme song, but this suicide will not be painless.
Who knows, perhaps Abbas and company will erect a statue of Secretary Rice (their Marquis de Lafayette) in the future Palestinian state – just after they demolish the Knesset and Western wall, turn Yad Vashem into a mosque and drive the Jews into the sea.
Frontpage
Kisses From Condi
Push to undermine AIPAC aids possible U.S. tilt toward Palestinians, not peace. Reports coming from Israeli military and intelligence sources lately all agree: Trouble is brewing in Gaza, where the Hamas-run government has presided over an unprecedented buildup of arms.
After more than a year of pinpricks by Gaza-based terrorists firing primitive Kassam rockets into southern Israel, Hamas may be ready for a new escalation of violence. Indeed, the talk of them trying to emulate Hezbollah's "victory" in Lebanon is rampant.
American and European sanctions on the Palestinian Authority, which have sought to isolate the Hamas government elected in January, have not prompted Palestinians to draw the correct conclusion from events. Driven by a political culture and an educational system that places the highest value on the eradication of Israel, the P.A., whether it is led by Hamas or the supposedly more moderate Fatah Party of President Mahmoud Abbas, appears incapable of making peace.
Under these circumstances, advocates in Israel of further territorial withdrawals are quiet. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, elected less than seven months ago on a platform whose chief plank was a pullout from much of the West Bank, is now silent on the issue. The proposal is, at least for the foreseeable future, as dead as a door nail.
END-AROUND LEFT FLANK
What then should Americans who care about Israel do? According to some on the political left, the answer is to push for pressure on the United States to to jump-start the non-existent chances for peace.
That's right, some of our leading lights think all we need to do is to go back to the old failed formula of support for Palestinian "moderates" and pressure on Israel to be more forthcoming.
Rather than focus on the obvious disinterest of the Palestinians in peace and the need to bolster Israel as it recovers from the recent Lebanon war, some of us have chosen a more accessible culprit than Hamas: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known as AIPAC.
They were at pains to avoid the charge of competing with the lobby, which represents an across-the-board alliance of Jewish groups dedicated to support of the U.S.-Israel alliance. But there was little question that an end-around the left flank of AIPAC was the purpose of reported meetings of financiers and activists.
Emboldened by the ability of an ad-hoc grouping of left-wing groups that challenged AIPAC during the congressional debate over sanctions on the Hamas-run P.A., the idea of forming a new group whose purpose would be to mobilize support for a more "activist" policy than that contemplated by AIPAC seems to be very much on the minds of some activists.
Raising alarms for some observers is that a principal funder of the proposed new group would be financier George Soros. The idea that the billionaire's first major gift to a Jewish group would be one aimed at undermining AIPAC seems to speak more of his previous support for far-left causes such as the MoveOn.org group than of a new commitment to the security of Israel.
AIPAC's success in cultivating the leadership of Congress in the last decade has also led to anger on the part of some liberals because that meant making nice with Republicans.
Yet the critique of AIPAC seems to center on the idea that it is "right-wing" because of its efforts to highlight Palestinian intransigence. That's a trifle ironic given AIPAC's history of supporting the policies of Israeli governments that veered left. Contrary to the gripes of some, the group was an enthusiastic backer of the Oslo fiasco, and was similarly supportive of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.
Opponents of the legislation penalizing the Palestinians for putting their government in the hands of terrorists mocked the bills supporters as trying to be more Zionist than the Israelis. But given the dormant nature of the Israeli left these days, the idea that AIPAC critics are more representative of Israeli positions than the supposedly out-of-touch "right" is a joke.
We could dismiss this latest maneuver as just meaningless Jewish politics were it not for an alarming development within the Bush administration that ought to be raising alarms among friends of Israel.
Following her recent failed mission to the region to bolster support for non-existent Palestinian moderates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice further confused the situation with an Oct. 11 speech in Washington to the American Task Force on Palestine, a pro-Arab group.
Though the theme of the presentation was supposedly to reinforce Palestinian moderates against Hamas, Rice failed to send a clear message that America would not tolerate further escalation of the conflict. Rice downplayed the threat from Hamas, and chose instead to pretend that this clear failure for the administration's democracy promotion project that their election victory represented was still a good idea.
A NEW WAY TO DEFINE 'SUPPORT'
Even worse, the secretary gave in to the impulse to rhetorical overkill, and wound up implicitly comparing the Palestinian nationalism to America's founding fathers and the U.S. civil rights movement. Reminders of the fate of other groups — such as the Kurds — who have been told to make do without an independent state rather than the American revolution would have been more useful.
When combined with further pledges of aid to a group that seems bent on renewed war, Rice's over-the-top talk could encourage the Palestinian leadership to think that Bush might be backing away from Israel. History shows that many a war has been launched by just such a diplomatic misjudgment.
When combined with other rumors floating around Washington about the supposed comeback of former Secretary of State James Baker (now part of a task force examining the Iraq war) to influence, the notion that this is the moment for Jewish supporters of Israel to be pushing the administration to ratchet up the pressure on Israel isn't just ill-timed, it's nuts.
Support for Israel does not require anyone to be unquestioning fans of AIPAC or unthinking cheerleaders for any Israeli government. But with Hamas spoiling for a fight to distract Palestinians from their misrule, U.S. calls to loosen up Israeli security measures at checkpoints or to release terror suspects would be a dangerous mistake.
What Palestinians need are not hugs and kisses from Condi Rice, but frank talk about what they stand to lose if they continue on their present path.
And just because some Americans are frustrated with the stalemate does not entitle us to encourage a push for concessions that can only lead to more bloodshed.
Jewish World Review
10.24.2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Palmach Ze'evi: Israel Is In Danger
Rehavam Ze'evi's son Palmach had sharp words for the army's leadership Sunday, berating its handling of the war in Lebanon and lambasting Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz for thinking "that the air force could wipe out a [fanatical] religious organization like Hizb'allah."
Speaking at the official memorial ceremony on Jerusalem's Mount Herzl marking the fifth anniversary of his father's assassination, Ze'evi emphasized his father's military service and lifelong dedication to Israel's security. Ze'evi said that his father's vision for a secure Jewish state was not being followed, and warned against what he described as the growing danger of militant Islam, whose purpose, he said, was "to exterminate everything that is not Islamic."
Archive: Knesset votes to memorialize Ze'evi legacy
Palestinians are indoctrinating their children to hate Israel, Ze'evi said, while Israel "gives gifts to terror."
"The Yassers and Mohammeds took you from us," the bereaved Ze'evi said in what seemed to be a mixture of anger and grief. Pausing to collect himself, Ze'evi added "but they did not take your legacy."
Among the political figures who attended the ceremony was President Moshe Katsav. When asked Sunday if he objected to Katsav, who is currently facing a number of criminal charges, making an appearance, Ze'evi replied, "Until [Katsav] resigns voluntarily, or is forced to by a Knesset vote, he's my president."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert eulogized Ze'evi as a "man of iron principles that did not bend and did not change." If the political reality did not match Ze'evi's powerful convictions, Olmert said, "then the reality had to change, and not the other way around."
"Ghandi could be a bitter political enemy and the most loyal friend at the same time," the prime minister remarked, reflecting the late Ze'evi's reputation as an outspoken firebrand who was also widely respected for his fairness and decency.
Born in Jerusalem in 1926, Ze'evi served in the underground Palmach and as an intelligence officer during the War of Independence. He headed the army's Central Command from 1968 until a week before the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War. When the war broke out he returned as a special adviser to the general staff and then served briefly as head of the army's operations branch.
Ze'evi retired from the military in 1974 and served in prime minister Yitzhak Rabin's government as an adviser on terrorism and security.
In 1988, Ze'evi founded the nationalist Moledet party, which won two seats in the 12th Knesset that year and later united with Israel Beiteinu. Ze'evi was known for his controversial right-wing views - in particular his advocacy of a "voluntary transfer" of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza.
He joined Ariel Sharon's government in 2001 as tourism minister, but resigned in protest of its handling of the second intifada.
Before his resignation went into effect, Palestinian gunmen shot Ze'evi in the head at close range as he walked to his room at the Hyatt hotel in Jerusalem.
Six members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine were held for his murder for almost four years in a Palestinian Authority jail in Jericho under British and American supervision, until the IDF captured them in March, after the US and Britain ordered their guards home.
Ahmed Sa'adat, the alleged mastermind of the assassination, was jailed in Israel on terrorism charges after authorities concluded there was not enough evidence to charge him with Ze'evi's murder.
Jerusalem Post
10.23.2006
Speaking at the official memorial ceremony on Jerusalem's Mount Herzl marking the fifth anniversary of his father's assassination, Ze'evi emphasized his father's military service and lifelong dedication to Israel's security. Ze'evi said that his father's vision for a secure Jewish state was not being followed, and warned against what he described as the growing danger of militant Islam, whose purpose, he said, was "to exterminate everything that is not Islamic."
Archive: Knesset votes to memorialize Ze'evi legacy
Palestinians are indoctrinating their children to hate Israel, Ze'evi said, while Israel "gives gifts to terror."
"The Yassers and Mohammeds took you from us," the bereaved Ze'evi said in what seemed to be a mixture of anger and grief. Pausing to collect himself, Ze'evi added "but they did not take your legacy."
Among the political figures who attended the ceremony was President Moshe Katsav. When asked Sunday if he objected to Katsav, who is currently facing a number of criminal charges, making an appearance, Ze'evi replied, "Until [Katsav] resigns voluntarily, or is forced to by a Knesset vote, he's my president."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert eulogized Ze'evi as a "man of iron principles that did not bend and did not change." If the political reality did not match Ze'evi's powerful convictions, Olmert said, "then the reality had to change, and not the other way around."
"Ghandi could be a bitter political enemy and the most loyal friend at the same time," the prime minister remarked, reflecting the late Ze'evi's reputation as an outspoken firebrand who was also widely respected for his fairness and decency.
Born in Jerusalem in 1926, Ze'evi served in the underground Palmach and as an intelligence officer during the War of Independence. He headed the army's Central Command from 1968 until a week before the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War. When the war broke out he returned as a special adviser to the general staff and then served briefly as head of the army's operations branch.
Ze'evi retired from the military in 1974 and served in prime minister Yitzhak Rabin's government as an adviser on terrorism and security.
In 1988, Ze'evi founded the nationalist Moledet party, which won two seats in the 12th Knesset that year and later united with Israel Beiteinu. Ze'evi was known for his controversial right-wing views - in particular his advocacy of a "voluntary transfer" of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza.
He joined Ariel Sharon's government in 2001 as tourism minister, but resigned in protest of its handling of the second intifada.
Before his resignation went into effect, Palestinian gunmen shot Ze'evi in the head at close range as he walked to his room at the Hyatt hotel in Jerusalem.
Six members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine were held for his murder for almost four years in a Palestinian Authority jail in Jericho under British and American supervision, until the IDF captured them in March, after the US and Britain ordered their guards home.
Ahmed Sa'adat, the alleged mastermind of the assassination, was jailed in Israel on terrorism charges after authorities concluded there was not enough evidence to charge him with Ze'evi's murder.
Jerusalem Post
10.23.2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Israeli 'Virtual Cancer' Engine Accurately Predicts Cancer
Israeli biotechnology start-up Optimata has won a seal of approval for its new computerized virtual cancer patient technology from Cancer Research UK after a successful trial at Nottingham City Hospital.
In the joint clinical study held by Optimata and Cancer UK, it was found that Optimata's Virtual Cancer Patient Engine (VCP) enabled doctors to correctly predict how individual breast cancer patients will respond to chemotherapy treatment in 70 percent of cases. This is substantially higher than the current prediction accuracy of oncologists which is estimated to be 25-30 percent.
In the study, which involved 33 patients suffering advanced breast cancer that has spread to the liver, lymph nodes or lungs, researchers programmed the VCP to model how individual breast cancer patients would be expected to respond to the chemotherapy drugs docetaxel or doxorubicin. These drugs can be used on their own to treat a number of cancers, but have different effects in different people, making treatment unpredictable.
The VCP looked at how the drugs would affect the growth of the cancer, how the drugs would behave in the body, how the cancer cells would respond to the drugs, and which drug out of the two would work best in each patient based on the size of their tumors and the speed at which they were growing.
Researchers then compared the predictions of the VCP with the actual response of the patients to test the effectiveness of the technology.
"We found the computer program accurately predicted how the patients responded to treatment in around 70 percent of cases," said Dr. Stephen Chan, head of the Department of Clinical Oncology at Nottingham City Hospital and the director of the study.
"This was a very interesting early study that could potentially have a big impact on how cancer patients are treated in the future," added Kate Law, director of clinical trials at Cancer Research UK. "Tailoring treatments to individual patients will ensure the best possible outcome for every patient. This is a hugely important area of cancer research."
Optimata was founded in 1999 by world-renowned biomathematician Prof. Zvia Agur, the company's chairman and chief scientific officer. It has been supported financially by private European investors, and Israel's Office of the Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, which also paid for the Nottingham trial alongside Optimata.
Aside from the Nottingham City Hospital trial, the company is currently completing a bio-simulation clinical trial on breast cancer patients in collaboration with Soroka University Medical Center in Israel.
Optimata's VCP technology is based on a computer-generated method of accurately predicting how individual patients or patient populations will respond to a compound. The technology combines computer models of human physiology, specific diseases and the therapeutic impact of a compound. The in-silico technology enables drug developers to conduct experiments at an unprecedented scale, enabling an unlimited number of "virtual trials" to be carried out on an almost infinite combination of dosages, treatment schedules and patient population characteristics.
Aside from drug development, the technology can also be used for drug treatment repurposing - enabling drug developers to find new uses for drugs that have not proven successful in development - and in clinics and hospitals for improving the efficacy of current drug treatments on patients.
By predicting how a drug will affect a patient, the technology allows doctors to tailor treatment more accurately to ensure that patients receive the most appropriate and effective therapy for their particular disease. Aside from increasing the efficacy of treatments, this can also reduce the amount of drug a patient needs to take, easing the often-debilitating side effects.
Though the technology can be used for any number of diseases, Optimata is focusing initially on cancer.
"This is a huge field," said Agur.
The Nottingham City Hospital trial began in December 2004. "Every cancer is slightly different and every patient will respond to treatment differently. We wanted to find a way to predict how patients would respond to a particular drug in order to limit their side effects and give them the best chance of beating their disease," said Dr. Abhik Mukherjee, from the hospital.
In the wake of this trial, Agur said new Phase II clinical trials are planned, which will compare the efficacy of the VCP against that of physicians in finding the best drug regime for patients. Agur said she hopes some of these trials will take place in the UK.
The 15-person company based in Ramat Gan has collaboration agreements for the use of its technology with multinational pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly & Co., and other drug companies. The start-up now plans a new round of fund-raising, and hopes to raise about $3 million.
"We are thrilled with the results of this study which validates our technology and offers new hope for cancer patients," said Guy Malchi, Optimata's CEO. "In the clinical setting our VCP technology offers the prospect of made-to-measure, safer and more cost-efficient use of therapies. In the global drug industry the VCP already is transforming drug development as more and more biopharmaceutical companies are using our technology to predict the outcome of drug candidates."
"The results of this study show the enormous potential the VCP has as a tool for treatment individualization," added Agur.
Israel 21st Century
10.22.2006
In the joint clinical study held by Optimata and Cancer UK, it was found that Optimata's Virtual Cancer Patient Engine (VCP) enabled doctors to correctly predict how individual breast cancer patients will respond to chemotherapy treatment in 70 percent of cases. This is substantially higher than the current prediction accuracy of oncologists which is estimated to be 25-30 percent.
In the study, which involved 33 patients suffering advanced breast cancer that has spread to the liver, lymph nodes or lungs, researchers programmed the VCP to model how individual breast cancer patients would be expected to respond to the chemotherapy drugs docetaxel or doxorubicin. These drugs can be used on their own to treat a number of cancers, but have different effects in different people, making treatment unpredictable.
The VCP looked at how the drugs would affect the growth of the cancer, how the drugs would behave in the body, how the cancer cells would respond to the drugs, and which drug out of the two would work best in each patient based on the size of their tumors and the speed at which they were growing.
Researchers then compared the predictions of the VCP with the actual response of the patients to test the effectiveness of the technology.
"We found the computer program accurately predicted how the patients responded to treatment in around 70 percent of cases," said Dr. Stephen Chan, head of the Department of Clinical Oncology at Nottingham City Hospital and the director of the study.
"This was a very interesting early study that could potentially have a big impact on how cancer patients are treated in the future," added Kate Law, director of clinical trials at Cancer Research UK. "Tailoring treatments to individual patients will ensure the best possible outcome for every patient. This is a hugely important area of cancer research."
Optimata was founded in 1999 by world-renowned biomathematician Prof. Zvia Agur, the company's chairman and chief scientific officer. It has been supported financially by private European investors, and Israel's Office of the Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, which also paid for the Nottingham trial alongside Optimata.
Aside from the Nottingham City Hospital trial, the company is currently completing a bio-simulation clinical trial on breast cancer patients in collaboration with Soroka University Medical Center in Israel.
Optimata's VCP technology is based on a computer-generated method of accurately predicting how individual patients or patient populations will respond to a compound. The technology combines computer models of human physiology, specific diseases and the therapeutic impact of a compound. The in-silico technology enables drug developers to conduct experiments at an unprecedented scale, enabling an unlimited number of "virtual trials" to be carried out on an almost infinite combination of dosages, treatment schedules and patient population characteristics.
Aside from drug development, the technology can also be used for drug treatment repurposing - enabling drug developers to find new uses for drugs that have not proven successful in development - and in clinics and hospitals for improving the efficacy of current drug treatments on patients.
By predicting how a drug will affect a patient, the technology allows doctors to tailor treatment more accurately to ensure that patients receive the most appropriate and effective therapy for their particular disease. Aside from increasing the efficacy of treatments, this can also reduce the amount of drug a patient needs to take, easing the often-debilitating side effects.
Though the technology can be used for any number of diseases, Optimata is focusing initially on cancer.
"This is a huge field," said Agur.
The Nottingham City Hospital trial began in December 2004. "Every cancer is slightly different and every patient will respond to treatment differently. We wanted to find a way to predict how patients would respond to a particular drug in order to limit their side effects and give them the best chance of beating their disease," said Dr. Abhik Mukherjee, from the hospital.
In the wake of this trial, Agur said new Phase II clinical trials are planned, which will compare the efficacy of the VCP against that of physicians in finding the best drug regime for patients. Agur said she hopes some of these trials will take place in the UK.
The 15-person company based in Ramat Gan has collaboration agreements for the use of its technology with multinational pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly & Co., and other drug companies. The start-up now plans a new round of fund-raising, and hopes to raise about $3 million.
"We are thrilled with the results of this study which validates our technology and offers new hope for cancer patients," said Guy Malchi, Optimata's CEO. "In the clinical setting our VCP technology offers the prospect of made-to-measure, safer and more cost-efficient use of therapies. In the global drug industry the VCP already is transforming drug development as more and more biopharmaceutical companies are using our technology to predict the outcome of drug candidates."
"The results of this study show the enormous potential the VCP has as a tool for treatment individualization," added Agur.
Israel 21st Century
10.22.2006
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Return the Golan?
The Golan Heights is a semi-mountainous escarpment of some 451 square miles, ranging in height from 400 to 3,000 feet. It rises steeply from the eastern and northern shores of the Sea of Galilee, runs the length of the Huleh Valley and overlooks the coastal plains of the Galilee and northern Israel. There is a Jewish connection to the Golan, as it is dotted with ancient Jewish villages and synagogues.
In 1948, Syria joined with other Arab states in an aggressive attack against the newly re-established State of Israel. Syria was defeated by Israeli forces and an armistice line was drawn between the two nations in 1949. From 1949 to 1967, Syria used its position on the Heights to shell Israeli farms and settlements in the Galilee below, and to attack Israeli water projects in the Huleh Valley. In 1964, Syrians on the Golan attempted to divert the headwaters of the Jordan River, which would have severely curtailed Israel's water supply. Israel used military force to oppose the diversion.
In June 1967, at the start of the Six Day War, Syria again joined Egypt and Jordan in an aggressive attack against Israel designed to obliterate the Jewish State. Artillery fire from the Heights rained down on the Israelis below. The Syrian positions, built with Soviet assistance and guidance, were deemed impregnable, with layers of fortifications and overlapping fields of fire. I recall personally visiting Tel Azzyazziat and viewing, through a machine gun position, the Israeli fields and fish ponds below. At great cost, the IDF stormed the Heights and captured them from Syria.
Six years later, at the outbreak of the October 1973 Yom Kippur War, Syria mounted a massive surprise armored attack into the territory. In a costly stand, the IDF stopped the Syrian thrust across the Golan and then counterattacked, driving a fifteen-mile bulge into Syria. Israel later withdrew from this bulge in 1974, but stayed on the Heights.
It is important to recall that there is some legal question as to the status of the Golan Heights belonging to Syria in the first place. On June 30, 1939, France detached the Sanjak of Alexandretta from Syria and ceded it to Turkey. To date, Syria has never recognized this transfer of territory, terming it illegal. Similarly, in 1923 Great Britain transferred the Golan Heights from Mandatory Palestine to the French Mandate of Syria under a Franco-British agreement delineating the boundary between the two mandates. Israel is the legal successor state to Mandatory Palestine. Thus, the Golan Heights is an area in dispute. The Syrians can't have it both ways. If they insist on return of Alexandretta, then Israel has the right to insist on return of the Golan Heights.
Under international law, the principle of ex injuria jus non oritur ("right cannot originate from wrong") calls for the punishment of an aggressor state. Syria launched aggressive war against Israel directly three times, in 1948, 1967 and 1973. It committed acts of war from 1949-1967. By those acts, it has forfeited any claim to the Golan Heights as surely as Germany lost territory to both Poland and Russia (then the Soviet Union) after its aggression in World War II. Similarly, Japan lost territory to China, Korea and Russia after that same conflict.
Now, unable to regain the Golan Heights by force, having tried direct attack in October 1973, Syria and Hizbullah manufactured the bogus issue of the Shebaa Farms. The Shebaa Farms is part of Mt. Dov and the Golan Heights. Hizbullah claims it is part of Lebanon, in order to give Hizbullah an excuse to keep fighting against Israel. The weak, still Syrian-influenced Lebanese government agreed. They all demand that Israel return the area, a 200-square-kilometer piece of territory, as basically a reward for Hizbullah's aggression. The United Nations, after Israel's unilateral withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, certified that Israel had indeed withdrawn from all of Lebanon, and that the Shebaa Farms was part of the territorial dispute between Israel and Syria.
Syria still seeks to use force to regain the Golan. In July 2006, even before the rockets stopped flying from Lebanon into Israel, Bashar Assad, the president of Syria, announced the formation of a new terrorist group, the Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights. Hizbullah had shown the way, stated Assad. Terrorism and rocket fire, he claimed, had defeated Israel; indeed, terrorism alone had forced the unilateral withdrawals by Israel from southern Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005. Now, Assad plans to use these tactics and weapons to open a fourth front (escalating terrorist attacks from Judea-Samaria being the third) in the ongoing, 135-year Arab-Muslim war against the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. Hizbullah has already volunteered to train the Syrians. No doubt the Iranians will be there as well, as they were in Lebanon.
Incredibly, as the most recent round of fighting ended, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his Foreign Minister Tsippy Livni began speaking of negotiating with the Assad regime. That regime had just threatened Israel and vowed to attack the Jewish state again. Appeasement proved to be a failure in 1938, it has been proven a failure in the 13 years of the misnamed Oslo "peace process." Retreat has only encouraged terrorism and war. It has emboldened the patron states of Syria and Iran and their terrorist minions, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah and others (new groups are formed on a regular basis).
For Israel to retreat from, let alone return, the Golan Heights to Syrian control would be the height of geopolitical folly. Given the range of today's missiles, virtually more than one-half of all of Israel would literally be under the gun from even the short-range missiles.
The Golan was under British control for three years, under Syrian control for 44 years and under Israeli control for 39 years. Under Syrian control, it was used only as a launching pad for attacks on Israel. Under Israeli control, it has become a peaceful and productive region, threatening no nation. Given the historic record, the Golan Heights is essential to Israel's security. It should remain in Israel's hands.
Israel National News
10.21.2006
In 1948, Syria joined with other Arab states in an aggressive attack against the newly re-established State of Israel. Syria was defeated by Israeli forces and an armistice line was drawn between the two nations in 1949. From 1949 to 1967, Syria used its position on the Heights to shell Israeli farms and settlements in the Galilee below, and to attack Israeli water projects in the Huleh Valley. In 1964, Syrians on the Golan attempted to divert the headwaters of the Jordan River, which would have severely curtailed Israel's water supply. Israel used military force to oppose the diversion.
In June 1967, at the start of the Six Day War, Syria again joined Egypt and Jordan in an aggressive attack against Israel designed to obliterate the Jewish State. Artillery fire from the Heights rained down on the Israelis below. The Syrian positions, built with Soviet assistance and guidance, were deemed impregnable, with layers of fortifications and overlapping fields of fire. I recall personally visiting Tel Azzyazziat and viewing, through a machine gun position, the Israeli fields and fish ponds below. At great cost, the IDF stormed the Heights and captured them from Syria.
Six years later, at the outbreak of the October 1973 Yom Kippur War, Syria mounted a massive surprise armored attack into the territory. In a costly stand, the IDF stopped the Syrian thrust across the Golan and then counterattacked, driving a fifteen-mile bulge into Syria. Israel later withdrew from this bulge in 1974, but stayed on the Heights.
It is important to recall that there is some legal question as to the status of the Golan Heights belonging to Syria in the first place. On June 30, 1939, France detached the Sanjak of Alexandretta from Syria and ceded it to Turkey. To date, Syria has never recognized this transfer of territory, terming it illegal. Similarly, in 1923 Great Britain transferred the Golan Heights from Mandatory Palestine to the French Mandate of Syria under a Franco-British agreement delineating the boundary between the two mandates. Israel is the legal successor state to Mandatory Palestine. Thus, the Golan Heights is an area in dispute. The Syrians can't have it both ways. If they insist on return of Alexandretta, then Israel has the right to insist on return of the Golan Heights.
Under international law, the principle of ex injuria jus non oritur ("right cannot originate from wrong") calls for the punishment of an aggressor state. Syria launched aggressive war against Israel directly three times, in 1948, 1967 and 1973. It committed acts of war from 1949-1967. By those acts, it has forfeited any claim to the Golan Heights as surely as Germany lost territory to both Poland and Russia (then the Soviet Union) after its aggression in World War II. Similarly, Japan lost territory to China, Korea and Russia after that same conflict.
Now, unable to regain the Golan Heights by force, having tried direct attack in October 1973, Syria and Hizbullah manufactured the bogus issue of the Shebaa Farms. The Shebaa Farms is part of Mt. Dov and the Golan Heights. Hizbullah claims it is part of Lebanon, in order to give Hizbullah an excuse to keep fighting against Israel. The weak, still Syrian-influenced Lebanese government agreed. They all demand that Israel return the area, a 200-square-kilometer piece of territory, as basically a reward for Hizbullah's aggression. The United Nations, after Israel's unilateral withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, certified that Israel had indeed withdrawn from all of Lebanon, and that the Shebaa Farms was part of the territorial dispute between Israel and Syria.
Syria still seeks to use force to regain the Golan. In July 2006, even before the rockets stopped flying from Lebanon into Israel, Bashar Assad, the president of Syria, announced the formation of a new terrorist group, the Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights. Hizbullah had shown the way, stated Assad. Terrorism and rocket fire, he claimed, had defeated Israel; indeed, terrorism alone had forced the unilateral withdrawals by Israel from southern Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005. Now, Assad plans to use these tactics and weapons to open a fourth front (escalating terrorist attacks from Judea-Samaria being the third) in the ongoing, 135-year Arab-Muslim war against the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. Hizbullah has already volunteered to train the Syrians. No doubt the Iranians will be there as well, as they were in Lebanon.
Incredibly, as the most recent round of fighting ended, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his Foreign Minister Tsippy Livni began speaking of negotiating with the Assad regime. That regime had just threatened Israel and vowed to attack the Jewish state again. Appeasement proved to be a failure in 1938, it has been proven a failure in the 13 years of the misnamed Oslo "peace process." Retreat has only encouraged terrorism and war. It has emboldened the patron states of Syria and Iran and their terrorist minions, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah and others (new groups are formed on a regular basis).
For Israel to retreat from, let alone return, the Golan Heights to Syrian control would be the height of geopolitical folly. Given the range of today's missiles, virtually more than one-half of all of Israel would literally be under the gun from even the short-range missiles.
The Golan was under British control for three years, under Syrian control for 44 years and under Israeli control for 39 years. Under Syrian control, it was used only as a launching pad for attacks on Israel. Under Israeli control, it has become a peaceful and productive region, threatening no nation. Given the historic record, the Golan Heights is essential to Israel's security. It should remain in Israel's hands.
Israel National News
10.21.2006
Friday, October 20, 2006
Europe Knows Not Evil
I, a French-born rabbi, have been sitting in a small synagogue in Brussels, celebrating the High Holy Days. Almost 200 years ago to the day, Napoleon convened an assembly of Jewish leaders to help him open the door of citizenship to French Jews. It was the Enlightenment. The Jews of France prepared to receive equal rights and become full partners in the affairs of state. They could call Europe home.
Now I wonder if it was all an illusion. I and other Jews have begun moving toward the sad and frankly terrifying realization that ultimately we may have no home in Europe. It is not that I no longer identify as a European, or that somehow my sense of loyalty to the place of my birth has weakened. No, it is not me who has changed, but Europe. A conflict has emerged between this new Europe and my Jewishness, and I do not know how to resolve it.
MUCH HAS been said and written about the reemergence of anti-Semitism in Europe, but all the discussion hasn't made the phenomenon any more comprehensible to me. I suppose that after the Holocaust, no amount of anti-Semitic madness should surprise us. Yet, I am surprised - and frightened.
I am frightened not just by the anti-Semitism but by the collective European response of indifference and appeasement. Today, Europe worships compromise. It is "fanatical" in its non-violence. It is a Europe that, in the face of Islamist fanaticism, is ready to stay silent.
This is the heart of the matter. By refusing to truly battle the Islamist ideology, by refusing to firmly and consistently oppose the dangers of Iranian nuclear proliferation, by refusing to support Israel in its battle against the menace of Hizbullah, Europe is saying everything is "negotiable."
MY FAITH forces me to reflect on the eventuality of having to confront radical evil. It teaches that everything is not negotiable; not everything can be compromised.
When I read in Deuteronomy that it is my religious duty to "erase the memory of Amalek from beneath the heavens," I frankly find myself frightened by the violence of the passage. How can we accept a religious commandment that necessitates us, under certain circumstances, to annihilate the Other?
This dilemma is not only mine. There's a story about an Orthodox Jew who went to Martin Buber, the great German-Jewish philosopher of the 20th century, to tell him of his profound dilemma: "How is it," he said to Buber, "that when King Saul showed mercy in his struggle against Agog, the king of the Amalekites, he was chastised by the Prophet Samuel for showing himself capable of compassion and being ready to compromise?"
Buber remained silent for a few moments before answering. "I think that Samuel was mistaken about God's intentions."
BUT RABBI Emil Fackenheim, one of the great post-Shoah thinkers, strongly criticizes Buber's reply and tells us: "Through this answer, Buber disposes of the problem of absolute evil, because if Amalek is not its incarnation, then absolute evil does not exist. Here, we are therefore better served by tradition: Amalek continues to be recognized for what he is, but [also] as a symbol.
"On the level of Jewish values, to distinguish between Amalek and evil in general is always a difficult task. To an extreme extent, one risks seeing a replica of Amalek in every enemy, while in fact the rabbis recommend trying to make a friend of every enemy.
"However, our era has shown that the opposite danger is greater: that which consists in believing or dreaming that Amalek does not exist."
This last sentence warrants further thought. The price of refusing to believe in the existence of evil and in the absolute necessity of confronting it is often very high. Indeed, the greatest danger would be to consider every enemy as a "potential Amalek." Peace is an absolute value and we must always make compromises to achieve it. But we cannot, however, escape one crucial question: If we have to make compromises, with whom? Compromise and dialogue are not values in themselves if the question "with whom?" is not asked.
I fear that my religious tradition is indeed on a collision course with Europe, which seemingly refuses, on principle, all ideas of confrontation. Has Europe not learned that one day we have to confront what frightens and terrorizes us? Or is Europe still looking for a path to the laying down of arms and the dubious compromise?
For us, the Jews of Europe, after witnessing the murder of 6 million of our own, we find ourselves today unable to see eye-to-eye with the political orientation of our old continent. And if what is happening today is not the ultimate wake-up call for Europe, it seems to me that our presence in Europe, 200 years after we were granted citizenship, is reaching its end.
The writer is a member of the executive board of the European Jewish Information Center in Brussels.
Jerusalem Post
10.20.2006
Now I wonder if it was all an illusion. I and other Jews have begun moving toward the sad and frankly terrifying realization that ultimately we may have no home in Europe. It is not that I no longer identify as a European, or that somehow my sense of loyalty to the place of my birth has weakened. No, it is not me who has changed, but Europe. A conflict has emerged between this new Europe and my Jewishness, and I do not know how to resolve it.
MUCH HAS been said and written about the reemergence of anti-Semitism in Europe, but all the discussion hasn't made the phenomenon any more comprehensible to me. I suppose that after the Holocaust, no amount of anti-Semitic madness should surprise us. Yet, I am surprised - and frightened.
I am frightened not just by the anti-Semitism but by the collective European response of indifference and appeasement. Today, Europe worships compromise. It is "fanatical" in its non-violence. It is a Europe that, in the face of Islamist fanaticism, is ready to stay silent.
This is the heart of the matter. By refusing to truly battle the Islamist ideology, by refusing to firmly and consistently oppose the dangers of Iranian nuclear proliferation, by refusing to support Israel in its battle against the menace of Hizbullah, Europe is saying everything is "negotiable."
MY FAITH forces me to reflect on the eventuality of having to confront radical evil. It teaches that everything is not negotiable; not everything can be compromised.
When I read in Deuteronomy that it is my religious duty to "erase the memory of Amalek from beneath the heavens," I frankly find myself frightened by the violence of the passage. How can we accept a religious commandment that necessitates us, under certain circumstances, to annihilate the Other?
This dilemma is not only mine. There's a story about an Orthodox Jew who went to Martin Buber, the great German-Jewish philosopher of the 20th century, to tell him of his profound dilemma: "How is it," he said to Buber, "that when King Saul showed mercy in his struggle against Agog, the king of the Amalekites, he was chastised by the Prophet Samuel for showing himself capable of compassion and being ready to compromise?"
Buber remained silent for a few moments before answering. "I think that Samuel was mistaken about God's intentions."
BUT RABBI Emil Fackenheim, one of the great post-Shoah thinkers, strongly criticizes Buber's reply and tells us: "Through this answer, Buber disposes of the problem of absolute evil, because if Amalek is not its incarnation, then absolute evil does not exist. Here, we are therefore better served by tradition: Amalek continues to be recognized for what he is, but [also] as a symbol.
"On the level of Jewish values, to distinguish between Amalek and evil in general is always a difficult task. To an extreme extent, one risks seeing a replica of Amalek in every enemy, while in fact the rabbis recommend trying to make a friend of every enemy.
"However, our era has shown that the opposite danger is greater: that which consists in believing or dreaming that Amalek does not exist."
This last sentence warrants further thought. The price of refusing to believe in the existence of evil and in the absolute necessity of confronting it is often very high. Indeed, the greatest danger would be to consider every enemy as a "potential Amalek." Peace is an absolute value and we must always make compromises to achieve it. But we cannot, however, escape one crucial question: If we have to make compromises, with whom? Compromise and dialogue are not values in themselves if the question "with whom?" is not asked.
I fear that my religious tradition is indeed on a collision course with Europe, which seemingly refuses, on principle, all ideas of confrontation. Has Europe not learned that one day we have to confront what frightens and terrorizes us? Or is Europe still looking for a path to the laying down of arms and the dubious compromise?
For us, the Jews of Europe, after witnessing the murder of 6 million of our own, we find ourselves today unable to see eye-to-eye with the political orientation of our old continent. And if what is happening today is not the ultimate wake-up call for Europe, it seems to me that our presence in Europe, 200 years after we were granted citizenship, is reaching its end.
The writer is a member of the executive board of the European Jewish Information Center in Brussels.
Jerusalem Post
10.20.2006
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Israeli Airport Security Team Making LAX Safer
A team of Israeli airport security officials from Ben-Gurion International Airport is in Los Angeles this week advising Los Angeles International Airport officials on ways to improve security.
Nahum Liss, Hadas Levitan and Alon Browon of the B-G security authority examining the terminals, perimeter security, airfield and parking structures of LAX, and will likely make preliminary recommendations at the end of their visit.
"This is an unprecedented visit by the head of Israeli airport security to cooperate with us and help us spotlight what is needed," Councilman Jack Weiss told the Los Angeles Daily News. Weiss chairs the City Council's Public Safety Committee and arranged the visit by the Israeli security team.
"They sat down (Monday) with our professionals and you could almost see the sparks fly as they exchanged ideas," he said.
LAX is one of the busiest airports in the world and considered by American security experts to be a prime location for a terror attempt. Some 61.5 million travelers used LAX in 2005, compared with 60.7 million in 2004.
Security at LAX has been studied extensively for the past four years, including a periodic review by the Rand Corp., which has found the biggest vulnerabilities are the crowds outside terminals. In the most recent incident, a gunman killed two people when he opened fire at the airport's El Al ticket counter on July 4th, 2002.
While the Israeli security team is expected to pass on specific steps that officials at LAX can take to better secure the airport, it may not be practical to implement all the recommendations.
"You can't copy and paste Ben-Gurion's security into America," Weiss told AP. "It's a different airport, different scale, different problems. But what you can learn from (the Israelis) is the philosophy and the approach."
The team also will review the plans for the $576 million redesign of the Tom Bradley International Terminal to ensure that state-of-the-art security is included. And
Councilman Bill Rosendahl, whose 11th District includes LAX, told AP that he would like to see the Israeli advice implemented in the plans.
"Their insights will be invaluable for us. I hope that the best practices and the protocols that our partners in Israel give us will be incorporated into how we go forward with these renovations," he told AP.
Weiss, Deputy Mayor Maurice Suh, fire Chief William Bamattre and police Cmdr. Mike Downing toured Ben-Gurion Airport during a visit to Israel in March, when they met with security officials to gain insight on airport security. During the trip, Weiss invited the Israeli security officials to inspect LAX.
According to Israeli Consul General Ehud Danoch, it's imperative for the US and Israel to share information in their joint front against terror.
"The United States is a great ally of Israel and we always cooperate, especially now with the issue of terrorism over the past few years," Danoch told AP. "We have many experts in counter-terrorism, and we are going to continue to share the knowledge and our experience with the United States."
Israel 21st Century
10.19.2006
Nahum Liss, Hadas Levitan and Alon Browon of the B-G security authority examining the terminals, perimeter security, airfield and parking structures of LAX, and will likely make preliminary recommendations at the end of their visit.
"This is an unprecedented visit by the head of Israeli airport security to cooperate with us and help us spotlight what is needed," Councilman Jack Weiss told the Los Angeles Daily News. Weiss chairs the City Council's Public Safety Committee and arranged the visit by the Israeli security team.
"They sat down (Monday) with our professionals and you could almost see the sparks fly as they exchanged ideas," he said.
LAX is one of the busiest airports in the world and considered by American security experts to be a prime location for a terror attempt. Some 61.5 million travelers used LAX in 2005, compared with 60.7 million in 2004.
Security at LAX has been studied extensively for the past four years, including a periodic review by the Rand Corp., which has found the biggest vulnerabilities are the crowds outside terminals. In the most recent incident, a gunman killed two people when he opened fire at the airport's El Al ticket counter on July 4th, 2002.
While the Israeli security team is expected to pass on specific steps that officials at LAX can take to better secure the airport, it may not be practical to implement all the recommendations.
"You can't copy and paste Ben-Gurion's security into America," Weiss told AP. "It's a different airport, different scale, different problems. But what you can learn from (the Israelis) is the philosophy and the approach."
The team also will review the plans for the $576 million redesign of the Tom Bradley International Terminal to ensure that state-of-the-art security is included. And
Councilman Bill Rosendahl, whose 11th District includes LAX, told AP that he would like to see the Israeli advice implemented in the plans.
"Their insights will be invaluable for us. I hope that the best practices and the protocols that our partners in Israel give us will be incorporated into how we go forward with these renovations," he told AP.
Weiss, Deputy Mayor Maurice Suh, fire Chief William Bamattre and police Cmdr. Mike Downing toured Ben-Gurion Airport during a visit to Israel in March, when they met with security officials to gain insight on airport security. During the trip, Weiss invited the Israeli security officials to inspect LAX.
According to Israeli Consul General Ehud Danoch, it's imperative for the US and Israel to share information in their joint front against terror.
"The United States is a great ally of Israel and we always cooperate, especially now with the issue of terrorism over the past few years," Danoch told AP. "We have many experts in counter-terrorism, and we are going to continue to share the knowledge and our experience with the United States."
Israel 21st Century
10.19.2006
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Debugging The Peace Program
Have you ever banged your head against a wall? Does it accomplish anything, other than give you a headache and possibly damage the wall? If someone told you that banging your head against a wall would make you lose weight, or get rich, and you tried it and didn’t lose weight or get rich, would you keep on doing it anyway? Why would anyone want to bang their head against a wall anyway?
Sometimes even the most well-intentioned projects don’t perform in reality the way that they were expected to perform in theory. When that happens, it’s wise to look for errors in the original script before running the program again.
Sometimes all that is wrong is a misplaced comma or semicolon, and you’re up and running. Other programs are so full of bugs and errors and endless loops that they never execute successfully.
There is nothing more frustrating than trying to integrate a legacy application, which never really worked to begin with, into a new environment with which it is completely incompatible. It wasn’t working well before; it is completely broken now, and no amount of patching and tweaking can fix it, but produces even more errors. Just scrap it and start over with a blank screen.
Bug in design
Let’s just say that not even Microsoft would have released the “Peace Program” even as a beta, and if the “Peace Program” was a computer application, it would fail to even compile, let alone execute.
No corporation would support such a thoroughly useless project, or continue to employ incompetent developers who failed to produce a working application after thirteen years of tweaking and debugging.
The people who designed the “Peace Program” were not professional engineers or scientists who are trained to produce results based on proven methods, but career politicians determined to create a “legacy” for themselves without a thought to the consequences of failure.
This determination to obtain a “legacy” unattached to any measurable accomplishments was further impeded by the tragic murder of the chief developer, Yitzhak Rabin, which caused all his original errors and false expectations to become enshrined as critical core components never to be touched or tampered with.
Even worse, the extreme act of a deranged lone individual has been used to scapegoat and demonize the entire population of religious Zionists, particularly the “settlers” but also those living within the 1949 ceasefire lines, designated as “sacrifices for peace,” who are collectively and exclusively blamed for the failure of the program.
At the same time, the unstable element of “The Palestinians” is always designated as “peaceful,” “moderate,” and “innocent,” no matter how many acts of murder, kidnapping and terror they commit or how many unapologetic genocidal gangsters they elect to their government.
Matter of numbers
Even demonstrably provable mathematical facts are brushed aside in order for the “program” to proceed. The variable of “Palestinian demographic growth” is assigned an arbitrary number far in advance of its actual known value, as an excuse for further withdrawals and retreats, while the variable of “Jewish population” is assumed to be flexible and subject to removal at any time, for any reason.
Even more flawed is the assumption, based on no evidence, that the amount of land that can be exchanged for a true and lasting peace agreement is the total land area of the entire State of Israel.
When programmers screw up this badly, they get fired. When projects drag on with no evidence of progress or probability of success, they are scrapped. When the same actions applied over and over again consistently result in the same failure, it is time to stop repeating these fatal mistakes and try something else, something that hasn’t already been done and known to fail.
Getting back to the original question: Why would anyone want to repeatedly band their head against a wall?
Because it feels so good when you finally stop.
Gamla
10.18.2006
Sometimes even the most well-intentioned projects don’t perform in reality the way that they were expected to perform in theory. When that happens, it’s wise to look for errors in the original script before running the program again.
Sometimes all that is wrong is a misplaced comma or semicolon, and you’re up and running. Other programs are so full of bugs and errors and endless loops that they never execute successfully.
There is nothing more frustrating than trying to integrate a legacy application, which never really worked to begin with, into a new environment with which it is completely incompatible. It wasn’t working well before; it is completely broken now, and no amount of patching and tweaking can fix it, but produces even more errors. Just scrap it and start over with a blank screen.
Bug in design
Let’s just say that not even Microsoft would have released the “Peace Program” even as a beta, and if the “Peace Program” was a computer application, it would fail to even compile, let alone execute.
No corporation would support such a thoroughly useless project, or continue to employ incompetent developers who failed to produce a working application after thirteen years of tweaking and debugging.
The people who designed the “Peace Program” were not professional engineers or scientists who are trained to produce results based on proven methods, but career politicians determined to create a “legacy” for themselves without a thought to the consequences of failure.
This determination to obtain a “legacy” unattached to any measurable accomplishments was further impeded by the tragic murder of the chief developer, Yitzhak Rabin, which caused all his original errors and false expectations to become enshrined as critical core components never to be touched or tampered with.
Even worse, the extreme act of a deranged lone individual has been used to scapegoat and demonize the entire population of religious Zionists, particularly the “settlers” but also those living within the 1949 ceasefire lines, designated as “sacrifices for peace,” who are collectively and exclusively blamed for the failure of the program.
At the same time, the unstable element of “The Palestinians” is always designated as “peaceful,” “moderate,” and “innocent,” no matter how many acts of murder, kidnapping and terror they commit or how many unapologetic genocidal gangsters they elect to their government.
Matter of numbers
Even demonstrably provable mathematical facts are brushed aside in order for the “program” to proceed. The variable of “Palestinian demographic growth” is assigned an arbitrary number far in advance of its actual known value, as an excuse for further withdrawals and retreats, while the variable of “Jewish population” is assumed to be flexible and subject to removal at any time, for any reason.
Even more flawed is the assumption, based on no evidence, that the amount of land that can be exchanged for a true and lasting peace agreement is the total land area of the entire State of Israel.
When programmers screw up this badly, they get fired. When projects drag on with no evidence of progress or probability of success, they are scrapped. When the same actions applied over and over again consistently result in the same failure, it is time to stop repeating these fatal mistakes and try something else, something that hasn’t already been done and known to fail.
Getting back to the original question: Why would anyone want to repeatedly band their head against a wall?
Because it feels so good when you finally stop.
Gamla
10.18.2006
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
President Bush Continues To Legitimize PLO
US President George W. Bush on Saturday extended the right of the PLO to maintain an official presence in Washington for another six months, just as he has done every six months since becoming president.
Read the official letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:
"I hereby determine and certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions."
Those provisions cited by the standard letter refer to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, which prohibits the PLO from maintaining an official presence in Washington.
The act was passed into law during a time when the PLO was still recognized as the preeminent global terrorist network, and its leader Yasser Arafat as the Osama bin Laden of his day.
Today, the Washington offices of the PLO act as the primary contact point between the Bush administration and PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas, who Bush insists is a "moderate," despite the fact that Abbas for decades served as Arafat's right-hand man.
The PLO office's presence in Washington and official recognition by Bush also violates the so-called "Oslo" peace accords, which forbid the "Palestinians" from establishing de facto embassies and conducting foreign relations prior to a final peace agreement.
Jerusalem Newswire
10.16.2006
Read the official letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:
"I hereby determine and certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions."
Those provisions cited by the standard letter refer to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, which prohibits the PLO from maintaining an official presence in Washington.
The act was passed into law during a time when the PLO was still recognized as the preeminent global terrorist network, and its leader Yasser Arafat as the Osama bin Laden of his day.
Today, the Washington offices of the PLO act as the primary contact point between the Bush administration and PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas, who Bush insists is a "moderate," despite the fact that Abbas for decades served as Arafat's right-hand man.
The PLO office's presence in Washington and official recognition by Bush also violates the so-called "Oslo" peace accords, which forbid the "Palestinians" from establishing de facto embassies and conducting foreign relations prior to a final peace agreement.
Jerusalem Newswire
10.16.2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
Syrian Military Instructors In Gaza
AMAN chief Maj.-Gen Amos Yadlin and head of research division Brig. Yossi Baidatz also reported to the Israeli cabinet Sunday, Oct. 15. that Hamas is taking delivery of anti-air missiles as well as anti-tank rockets.
Saturday night, 3 Qassam missiles exploding near at Nir Am triggered an Israeli air strike at Palestinian launch team near Jebalya, N. Gaza.
During the day, Israeli forces killed 8 Palestinian gunmen in clashes in Jebalya, northern Gaza Strip. At least 6 were from Hamas and they directed anti-tank fire at Israeli troops. They were killed when an Israeli rocket hit a house. Israeli ground forces are operating in three Gaza Strip sectors to fight off Palestinian missile attacks and destroy their arsenals.
The IDF has stepped up pressure since the June kidnapping of Cpl Gideon Shalit. This operation, which went into its fourth day Saturday, is aimed at stemming the inflow of Iranian long-range anti-tank weapons and Grad 17-km range rockets through the tunnels of the Philadelphi border strip with Egypt. The latest arrivals now are ground-to-air and anti-tank rockets. The Egyptian police do nothing to hinder the Palestinian terrorist arms build-up in Gaza through their lines in Sinai.
Debka File
10.16.2006
Saturday night, 3 Qassam missiles exploding near at Nir Am triggered an Israeli air strike at Palestinian launch team near Jebalya, N. Gaza.
During the day, Israeli forces killed 8 Palestinian gunmen in clashes in Jebalya, northern Gaza Strip. At least 6 were from Hamas and they directed anti-tank fire at Israeli troops. They were killed when an Israeli rocket hit a house. Israeli ground forces are operating in three Gaza Strip sectors to fight off Palestinian missile attacks and destroy their arsenals.
The IDF has stepped up pressure since the June kidnapping of Cpl Gideon Shalit. This operation, which went into its fourth day Saturday, is aimed at stemming the inflow of Iranian long-range anti-tank weapons and Grad 17-km range rockets through the tunnels of the Philadelphi border strip with Egypt. The latest arrivals now are ground-to-air and anti-tank rockets. The Egyptian police do nothing to hinder the Palestinian terrorist arms build-up in Gaza through their lines in Sinai.
Debka File
10.16.2006
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Unthinkable, Not Inevitable
Last week, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert convened a special meeting of security chiefs to discuss Israeli strategy toward the Iranian threat, amid concerns that Western responses to it are inadequate. These concerns have grown with the expectation that any sanctions imposed on North Korea after it claimed to have exploded a nuclear weapon will amount to little more than a slap on the wrist.
The prime minister's meeting reportedly concluded that Israel would continue to support the diplomatic approach toward the Iranian challenge, as led by the United States and Europe. In other words, Israel will continue to attempt to walk the fine line between encouraging the international community to take the lead on this global threat, and insisting that failure is not an option.
It is natural that the current situation would be compared to that which Israel faced in 1981, when it became clear that the world was doing nothing about Iraq's nuclear bid. Then, Menachem Begin ordered the strike on the Osirak reactor, which did set Saddam Hussein's nuclear program back about a decade. In 1991, the US discovered and destroyed Saddam's rebuilt program when it evicted the Iraqi army from Kuwait. When Saddam was removed in 2003, it seems he was further from developing a bomb than he had been decades earlier.
Iran, presumably, has learned from Saddam's experience and has hidden, hardened, dispersed and defended its nuclear program to a degree that it would stretch Israel's military capabilities to unilaterally incapacitate it. But Iran, unlike Iraq seemed in 1981, is not just Israel's problem.
By stepping back, Israel is trying to accentuate the global nature of the Iranian challenge, but Israel can and should be doing more to explain this. As a small country that the Iranian leadership openly says should be destroyed, Israel obviously has the most direct interest in preventing Iran from ever achieving such a capability. But the consequences for other nations of an Iranian nuke seem less obvious and need to be constantly reiterated.
Increasingly, as the world's feckless response adds to the impression that Iran will succeed in its nuclear quest, claims begin to mount that this is something that the world can live with. Not all Iranian leaders are as crazy as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and he may not control the weapons, we are assured. Besides, why would Iran risk the nuclear retaliation that any use of its weapons would assuredly bring?
As comforting as this line of thinking may be to some, it fails to address several critical aspects of the Iranian challenge. First, it ignores the apocalyptic and martyrdom-lionizing ideology of the Iranian leadership, under which the deaths of millions of Iranians could be justified as ushering in the return of the "hidden imam" and the triumph of Islam.
Second, even if the Iranian leadership is more like the Soviet politburo in its latter days than Adolf Hitler with respect to its belief in its own declared ideology, the dangers of an Iranian nuke are not limited to suicidal scenarios.
Even if the mullahs are intent on preserving their lives and their power, and therefore would never openly initiate a nuclear attack, this logic can hardly guarantee that they would not either transfer such a weapon to a terrorist group, or create a supposedly independent group for that purpose.
Iran specializes in proxy warfare. It is currently backing Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and assorted terrorist militias in Iraq. Is it really feasible for Israel or the US to automatically retaliate against Iran for a nuclear explosion of unknown origin? Finally, even if Iran neither explodes nor farms out a nuclear bomb, simply possessing one would greatly increase that regime's ability to foment "militia mayhem" - in Mideast expert David Makovsky's phrase - throughout the region and beyond.
The mullahs fervently believe that nuclear weapons will not only protect their regime, but allow them to expand their power and the grip of their own militant brand of Islam throughout the world. Israel cannot accept such a genocidal threat, but neither can other free nations accept such a blatant attempt to hijack the world order. Our government, crucially, should not allow the understandable desire to encourage a global response to be misinterpreted as a sign that even Israel is beginning to treat the unthinkable as inevitable.
Jerusalem Post
10.15.2006
The prime minister's meeting reportedly concluded that Israel would continue to support the diplomatic approach toward the Iranian challenge, as led by the United States and Europe. In other words, Israel will continue to attempt to walk the fine line between encouraging the international community to take the lead on this global threat, and insisting that failure is not an option.
It is natural that the current situation would be compared to that which Israel faced in 1981, when it became clear that the world was doing nothing about Iraq's nuclear bid. Then, Menachem Begin ordered the strike on the Osirak reactor, which did set Saddam Hussein's nuclear program back about a decade. In 1991, the US discovered and destroyed Saddam's rebuilt program when it evicted the Iraqi army from Kuwait. When Saddam was removed in 2003, it seems he was further from developing a bomb than he had been decades earlier.
Iran, presumably, has learned from Saddam's experience and has hidden, hardened, dispersed and defended its nuclear program to a degree that it would stretch Israel's military capabilities to unilaterally incapacitate it. But Iran, unlike Iraq seemed in 1981, is not just Israel's problem.
By stepping back, Israel is trying to accentuate the global nature of the Iranian challenge, but Israel can and should be doing more to explain this. As a small country that the Iranian leadership openly says should be destroyed, Israel obviously has the most direct interest in preventing Iran from ever achieving such a capability. But the consequences for other nations of an Iranian nuke seem less obvious and need to be constantly reiterated.
Increasingly, as the world's feckless response adds to the impression that Iran will succeed in its nuclear quest, claims begin to mount that this is something that the world can live with. Not all Iranian leaders are as crazy as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and he may not control the weapons, we are assured. Besides, why would Iran risk the nuclear retaliation that any use of its weapons would assuredly bring?
As comforting as this line of thinking may be to some, it fails to address several critical aspects of the Iranian challenge. First, it ignores the apocalyptic and martyrdom-lionizing ideology of the Iranian leadership, under which the deaths of millions of Iranians could be justified as ushering in the return of the "hidden imam" and the triumph of Islam.
Second, even if the Iranian leadership is more like the Soviet politburo in its latter days than Adolf Hitler with respect to its belief in its own declared ideology, the dangers of an Iranian nuke are not limited to suicidal scenarios.
Even if the mullahs are intent on preserving their lives and their power, and therefore would never openly initiate a nuclear attack, this logic can hardly guarantee that they would not either transfer such a weapon to a terrorist group, or create a supposedly independent group for that purpose.
Iran specializes in proxy warfare. It is currently backing Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and assorted terrorist militias in Iraq. Is it really feasible for Israel or the US to automatically retaliate against Iran for a nuclear explosion of unknown origin? Finally, even if Iran neither explodes nor farms out a nuclear bomb, simply possessing one would greatly increase that regime's ability to foment "militia mayhem" - in Mideast expert David Makovsky's phrase - throughout the region and beyond.
The mullahs fervently believe that nuclear weapons will not only protect their regime, but allow them to expand their power and the grip of their own militant brand of Islam throughout the world. Israel cannot accept such a genocidal threat, but neither can other free nations accept such a blatant attempt to hijack the world order. Our government, crucially, should not allow the understandable desire to encourage a global response to be misinterpreted as a sign that even Israel is beginning to treat the unthinkable as inevitable.
Jerusalem Post
10.15.2006
Saturday, October 14, 2006
The Need For Missile Defenses
Senior military officials who spoke with The Jerusalem Post this week were adamant: Defense Minister Amir Peretz was "mistaken" when he stated that an effective defense against Katyusha rockets could be deployed in two years. "Nothing will be ready in two years," one of the officials told our reporter, Yaakov Katz.
Two weeks ago, Peretz said in an interview, "Both Kassams and Katyushas are tactical weapons that have become strategic threats because we have yet to find an answer to them." Israel will obtain a "significant system that can [defend against these missiles] and this will happen in no more than two years," the defense minister said.
Security and Defense: Needed ASAP: A shield against rockets
Peretz is right about the significance of even primitive, short-range missiles if Israel has no way to defend against them. It is disturbing, however, that he seems to be misinformed about where the technology to do so stands, and is unwittingly misleading the public as a consequence.
As we report elsewhere on these pages, Israel is looking at both an American system called Skyguard and at developing its own system for shooting down short-range rockets. The American system, produced by Northrop Grumman, has shown success in tests but seems to be more than two years away from operational capability, and may prove too expensive to deploy against thousands of extremely cheap rockets. An Israeli company is developing another, laser-based, system, but it is also a number of years away from possible deployment.
In the minds of our enemies, the recent war in the north and the Kassam offensive from Gaza against towns in the South have demonstrated that the missile has largely replaced the suicide bomber as the terror weapon of choice. It took years for Israel to decide to build a security fence against suicide bombers - indeed, that fence has yet to be completed. We have been similarly slow to build equivalent defenses against short-range missiles.
In both cases, there were valid reasons for hesitation. With limited funds for national defense, we have preferred to invest in our capability to fight and deter terrorism rather than to erect barriers against it. Successful deterrence is the best defense, since it prevents attacks from being launched in the first place.
What must be realized, however, is that defenses, not only offensive capabilities, are critical components of deterrence. It is a myth that a defense must be 100 percent effective or else it is worthless. There would be a huge difference in an attacker's calculation when faced with zero defenses against short-range missiles, compared to a situation in which Israel could reliably shoot down 80% or more of missiles launched against it.
The importance of missile defense only grows with respect to medium- and long-range missiles. The Arrow system that Israel has already deployed against such missiles is a good start, but more should be done, and not just by Israel.
The US, for example, is currently defended by just 11 test interceptors in Alaska and California. These are inadequate to defend against the long-range missile threat, recently accentuated by North Korea's missile test in July and its purported nuclear test this week. Europe has no such defenses, and the US is not defended at all against medium- or short-range missiles that could be fired from ships.
It makes no sense for the West to forfeit its vast technological advantages and leave itself almost completely exposed to missile attack. In the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration reversed previous US antipathy to missile defenses, withdrew from the 1972 ABM Treaty that all but banned them, and committed to deploying a multi-layered defense of both US territory and US forces abroad. Yet actual defenses are not being developed and deployed as quickly as they should.
Missile-defense opponents, though they have largely conceded the debate on principle, have succeeded in steering spending away from the programs that seem to have most promise: space-based and sea-based systems that could address the ballistic missile threat on a global basis and in the near term.
One of the reasons that rogue states such as Iran and North Korea pursue both nuclear and long-range missile capability is that the West has so studiously avoided defending itself against just such threats. Missile defenses are critical both to deterring such proliferation, and to defending the free world should deterrence fail.
Jerusalem Post
10.14.2006
Two weeks ago, Peretz said in an interview, "Both Kassams and Katyushas are tactical weapons that have become strategic threats because we have yet to find an answer to them." Israel will obtain a "significant system that can [defend against these missiles] and this will happen in no more than two years," the defense minister said.
Security and Defense: Needed ASAP: A shield against rockets
Peretz is right about the significance of even primitive, short-range missiles if Israel has no way to defend against them. It is disturbing, however, that he seems to be misinformed about where the technology to do so stands, and is unwittingly misleading the public as a consequence.
As we report elsewhere on these pages, Israel is looking at both an American system called Skyguard and at developing its own system for shooting down short-range rockets. The American system, produced by Northrop Grumman, has shown success in tests but seems to be more than two years away from operational capability, and may prove too expensive to deploy against thousands of extremely cheap rockets. An Israeli company is developing another, laser-based, system, but it is also a number of years away from possible deployment.
In the minds of our enemies, the recent war in the north and the Kassam offensive from Gaza against towns in the South have demonstrated that the missile has largely replaced the suicide bomber as the terror weapon of choice. It took years for Israel to decide to build a security fence against suicide bombers - indeed, that fence has yet to be completed. We have been similarly slow to build equivalent defenses against short-range missiles.
In both cases, there were valid reasons for hesitation. With limited funds for national defense, we have preferred to invest in our capability to fight and deter terrorism rather than to erect barriers against it. Successful deterrence is the best defense, since it prevents attacks from being launched in the first place.
What must be realized, however, is that defenses, not only offensive capabilities, are critical components of deterrence. It is a myth that a defense must be 100 percent effective or else it is worthless. There would be a huge difference in an attacker's calculation when faced with zero defenses against short-range missiles, compared to a situation in which Israel could reliably shoot down 80% or more of missiles launched against it.
The importance of missile defense only grows with respect to medium- and long-range missiles. The Arrow system that Israel has already deployed against such missiles is a good start, but more should be done, and not just by Israel.
The US, for example, is currently defended by just 11 test interceptors in Alaska and California. These are inadequate to defend against the long-range missile threat, recently accentuated by North Korea's missile test in July and its purported nuclear test this week. Europe has no such defenses, and the US is not defended at all against medium- or short-range missiles that could be fired from ships.
It makes no sense for the West to forfeit its vast technological advantages and leave itself almost completely exposed to missile attack. In the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration reversed previous US antipathy to missile defenses, withdrew from the 1972 ABM Treaty that all but banned them, and committed to deploying a multi-layered defense of both US territory and US forces abroad. Yet actual defenses are not being developed and deployed as quickly as they should.
Missile-defense opponents, though they have largely conceded the debate on principle, have succeeded in steering spending away from the programs that seem to have most promise: space-based and sea-based systems that could address the ballistic missile threat on a global basis and in the near term.
One of the reasons that rogue states such as Iran and North Korea pursue both nuclear and long-range missile capability is that the West has so studiously avoided defending itself against just such threats. Missile defenses are critical both to deterring such proliferation, and to defending the free world should deterrence fail.
Jerusalem Post
10.14.2006
Friday, October 13, 2006
Jewish Charity Money Going To Arabs
A broad swath of center-right American Jewish groups is expressing shock and outrage that millions of dollars being raised by Jewish federations in North America for the post-war recovery effort in Israel is being used in part to help Israeli Arabs.
"To placate Israeli Arabs in the north who were celebrating Israel's defeat is totally absurd," fumed Helen Freedman, former director of the Americans for a Safe Israel. "Let the Arab countries take care of them. They are a fifth column that is working to support Hezb'allah and Hamas, and we foolish Jews are saying there is no difference between Israeli Arabs and Jews who were victims of this war."
Stephen Savitsky, president of the Orthodox Union whose own Israel emergency campaign merged with that of the United Jewish Communities, said he was unaware that the UJC money went to help Israeli Arabs. Told it does, Savitsky said he plans to ask the UJC to "segment the money" raised from OU members "to make sure it goes to the places we want."
He said that before the campaigns were merged, the money the OU raised was designed to "help Jews in need." He said it went to provide entertainment and food to those in bomb shelters and that "whoever was in the shelter we serviced; we didn't discriminate."
But the idea of the campaign, Savitsky said, was to "raise money to help Jews in need."
"If we help in Haifa and there are non-Jews there, we should not discriminate. But we would not go to an Arab village or town to give services."
A spokesman for the UJC said the money raised did not go to municipalities but rather to provide services for those in need — Jews and Arabs alike.
Howard Rieger, the UJC's president and CEO, when asked for a breakdown of the money, said that of the $92 million spent to date from the Israel Emergency Campaign, a total of $9 million, or some 10 percent, "went to [Israeli] Arabs." He said the campaign has thus far raised $329 million in pledges, and defended the decision to use the money to help Israeli Arabs and Druze.
"About one-third to one-half of those killed [by Hezb'allah rockets] were Israeli Arabs, as well as Druze who serve in the Israel Defense Forces and died in the IDF," he said. "We were getting kids out of harm's way [in the north], and we think it is a fair and valid use of the funds" to help Israeli Jewish and Arab youngsters.
Rieger said his organization was asked at the very beginning if it wanted to treat Israeli Jews and Arabs differently and that "our answer was no."
"We're proud of that," he said.
Asked about distribution of the rest of the money, Rieger said a committee is expected to decide that in about a month.
Freedman said, however, that she finds it distressing that the decision to use part of the money for Israeli Arabs was not widely known.
"I am sure that most people who give to the UJC have no clue that a percentage of their money is going to Arabs," she said. "I think they would be horrified. I have copies of letters from people who wrote to Howard Rieger denouncing" the move.
Among the e-mails Freedman said she received and shared with The Jewish Week was one from a man who called the help to Israeli Arabs "absurd," especially in light of the fact that the UJC "gave nothing" to the Jews made homeless by their expulsion from the Gaza Strip last summer.
Another writer wrote his response in rhyme: "How odd of G-d to choose the Jews, and how odd that Jews support those who want them to lose."
Steven Mostofsky, president of the National Council of Young Israel, said he was "really surprised" to learn that Israeli Arabs were benefiting from the Israel Emergency Campaign, which was launched shortly after the outbreak of the Israel-Hezbollah War in July.
"It's not that I want to seem harsh or that this is an anti-Arab statement, but money raised from Jews because of a war against Jews should only be used for Jews," he said. "There are plenty of Arab not-for-profits in the United States. They should be supporting the Arabs. … Any money that is raised because of the recent war should go to benefit the Jews who suffered in the war — those whose houses and businesses were destroyed and hospitalized soldiers whose families need support."
Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, said he too was unaware of the UJC practice and asked, "How did they determine that money should go there and that their donors would wish that money go to Israeli Arabs?"
Jewish World Review
10.13.2006
"To placate Israeli Arabs in the north who were celebrating Israel's defeat is totally absurd," fumed Helen Freedman, former director of the Americans for a Safe Israel. "Let the Arab countries take care of them. They are a fifth column that is working to support Hezb'allah and Hamas, and we foolish Jews are saying there is no difference between Israeli Arabs and Jews who were victims of this war."
Stephen Savitsky, president of the Orthodox Union whose own Israel emergency campaign merged with that of the United Jewish Communities, said he was unaware that the UJC money went to help Israeli Arabs. Told it does, Savitsky said he plans to ask the UJC to "segment the money" raised from OU members "to make sure it goes to the places we want."
He said that before the campaigns were merged, the money the OU raised was designed to "help Jews in need." He said it went to provide entertainment and food to those in bomb shelters and that "whoever was in the shelter we serviced; we didn't discriminate."
But the idea of the campaign, Savitsky said, was to "raise money to help Jews in need."
"If we help in Haifa and there are non-Jews there, we should not discriminate. But we would not go to an Arab village or town to give services."
A spokesman for the UJC said the money raised did not go to municipalities but rather to provide services for those in need — Jews and Arabs alike.
Howard Rieger, the UJC's president and CEO, when asked for a breakdown of the money, said that of the $92 million spent to date from the Israel Emergency Campaign, a total of $9 million, or some 10 percent, "went to [Israeli] Arabs." He said the campaign has thus far raised $329 million in pledges, and defended the decision to use the money to help Israeli Arabs and Druze.
"About one-third to one-half of those killed [by Hezb'allah rockets] were Israeli Arabs, as well as Druze who serve in the Israel Defense Forces and died in the IDF," he said. "We were getting kids out of harm's way [in the north], and we think it is a fair and valid use of the funds" to help Israeli Jewish and Arab youngsters.
Rieger said his organization was asked at the very beginning if it wanted to treat Israeli Jews and Arabs differently and that "our answer was no."
"We're proud of that," he said.
Asked about distribution of the rest of the money, Rieger said a committee is expected to decide that in about a month.
Freedman said, however, that she finds it distressing that the decision to use part of the money for Israeli Arabs was not widely known.
"I am sure that most people who give to the UJC have no clue that a percentage of their money is going to Arabs," she said. "I think they would be horrified. I have copies of letters from people who wrote to Howard Rieger denouncing" the move.
Among the e-mails Freedman said she received and shared with The Jewish Week was one from a man who called the help to Israeli Arabs "absurd," especially in light of the fact that the UJC "gave nothing" to the Jews made homeless by their expulsion from the Gaza Strip last summer.
Another writer wrote his response in rhyme: "How odd of G-d to choose the Jews, and how odd that Jews support those who want them to lose."
Steven Mostofsky, president of the National Council of Young Israel, said he was "really surprised" to learn that Israeli Arabs were benefiting from the Israel Emergency Campaign, which was launched shortly after the outbreak of the Israel-Hezbollah War in July.
"It's not that I want to seem harsh or that this is an anti-Arab statement, but money raised from Jews because of a war against Jews should only be used for Jews," he said. "There are plenty of Arab not-for-profits in the United States. They should be supporting the Arabs. … Any money that is raised because of the recent war should go to benefit the Jews who suffered in the war — those whose houses and businesses were destroyed and hospitalized soldiers whose families need support."
Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, said he too was unaware of the UJC practice and asked, "How did they determine that money should go there and that their donors would wish that money go to Israeli Arabs?"
Jewish World Review
10.13.2006
Thursday, October 12, 2006
God Says: "I WANT YOU!"
In years past when our country was threatened by enemies around the world, the nation of America began to pull together on every front. Men joined the army, women took over many of the jobs the men left, boys and girls pitched in and helped in many ways, there was food rationing as well as other items as well. When the danger was high and "freedom's way of life" was threatened, people put aside their differences and many of their selfish needs and pulled together for a cause greater than themselves.
One of the ways such campaigns were launched was through the use of the famous "Uncle Sam" poster on which he looked directly in the face of the view and pointed his long finger directly at them. People responded. They answered the "call" and willingly gave of themselves to the tasks at hand. It was this "unity" of cause that strengthened the nation and empowered people to work together to build in dangerous and uncertain times. Even today, we have seen some of that in the aftermath of the horrible attack on 9-11!
God is calling His people, and He is calling us to a greater cause than even the freedom of the nation we love! He is calling all who have received Him as Savior and Lord to rise up to prayer for the souls of lost men and women around this world. He is calling us to take a stand for Him, His Kingdom and His way of life in this dark hour in which we live.
If ever there was a time our God needs us, His people, to rise up under the "Banner of Jesus Christ", taking a stand for righteousness and truth in our own lives so that we can be pure vessels of honor for Him and of prayer toward Him...it is NOW!
I wish the times were simpler. I wish the dark storm clouds were not mounting up. I wish the "winds of war" were not picking up as they are. I wish we could just have a sweet little Sunday School lesson, say "nice things" and go home and take a nap! But sadly, that is not the truth!
As we read the headlines, listen to the television reports, read the internet by-lines, only an ostrich could fail to see the 'handwriting on the wall." We are in for an unpleasant time around the world, and the protected nation in which we live and abide in "peace and freedom" has been drawn into the fray!
We who are Christians must come forth to lift up our voices in prayer in this hour! God has called His people to awaken! He wants us to rise up, to be alert, watching in prayer with our spirits, and to begin to help Him sound the alarm that Jesus is coming! As the people of God, we must be ready! We must be willing to answer every call that He sends forth in these perilous days!
I have often written on a subject to which I "hear" God calling to us, His People: "AWAKE! ARISE! ALERT! ALARM!" and it still stands today. God is calling each of us to answer that call in our hearts! The deeper we get to the times of peril and turmoil we are hearing about through the news media, the more obvious the message is to everyone. We are seeing and hearing of many "End Time" scenarios in our news reports today!
In 1990, the Lord gave me four separate dreams of FIRE! In each one, I was in a burning building and I was trying to get people out before it consumed them. In every dream I warned, sounded alarms, pled, begged people to hear, and NONE would listen to me at that time! They ignored me, my urgent pleas, and imperative alarms. They pushed me away. They laughed at me for believing that there was a fire, much less that they were in actual danger. They were eating and drinking and reveling in a party mood, never accepting the truth of their impending doom!
Heartbroken, I went away sorrowful for their souls; for I knew how real this danger was and how much the "alarm" was needed! I have cried many tears in these last 14 years over those "visions" and His imperative "words" spoken to my spirit , for they were from the mouth of Almighty God! Yet the people in the dreams were deaf and blind to the truth of His "alarm"! How He longs for people to "wake up" and get away from the danger of not living close to Him and come to the safety of being obediently under the shelter of His Wings.
It was after these 3 sobering dreams, each coming over the period of a year, that I received the AWAKE! ARISE! ALERT! ALARM! word in a night of prayer! It was as if the Spirit of the Lord emblazoned this thought in my heart...and it has never left me, all these years! I recorded these piercing words in a personal journal and have often spoken them to Christians in the arenas of influence which I have been given. Each word is a call to action...and each word expects a response from the people of God!
Recently, the Lord impressed my heart again with these things, so I obediently raise this banner once again. He told me to open my mouth and give out that which He has given me and to begin calling forth "Release" to His people....to begin to OBEY Him in responding to His Spirit in these things.
His specific words were these: "Speak life! Release My Spirit in others. Watch as floodgates come down in people's lives, and My Spirit will flow out of their walled up hearts - many years of holding back and now they shall begin to flow in that which I have called them unto!"
"For the calling I have given you is a HOLY ONE, and NOW is the time in this darkest hour on earth to date for My Glory to begin covering the earth as the waters cover the sea. And it will be as My people begin to be released and give out that which I have faithfully given them that My waters shall cover the earth! Against the backdrop of world turmoil, My Word and My Light will shine increasingly unto an everlasting Day!"
May each of us be watching and listening in our hearts to what the Spirit of the Lord is speaking to us today. He will never speak to us anything He has not spoken in His written Word, for it is the foundation of our faith and our instructions for living.
Our God is calling and saying..."I want YOU!"
He is calling each of us to be obedient to the seeds of truth He, Himself, has planted there. Whatever He has asked of you, be it large or small..."Just DO IT"! Don't let the world "out-do" us with their Nike commercials!
When Jesus comes again, may He find us faithfull DOING the things He has sown in our hearts over the years.
Looking Unto Jesus,
Sandy Brunson
10.12.2006
One of the ways such campaigns were launched was through the use of the famous "Uncle Sam" poster on which he looked directly in the face of the view and pointed his long finger directly at them. People responded. They answered the "call" and willingly gave of themselves to the tasks at hand. It was this "unity" of cause that strengthened the nation and empowered people to work together to build in dangerous and uncertain times. Even today, we have seen some of that in the aftermath of the horrible attack on 9-11!
God is calling His people, and He is calling us to a greater cause than even the freedom of the nation we love! He is calling all who have received Him as Savior and Lord to rise up to prayer for the souls of lost men and women around this world. He is calling us to take a stand for Him, His Kingdom and His way of life in this dark hour in which we live.
If ever there was a time our God needs us, His people, to rise up under the "Banner of Jesus Christ", taking a stand for righteousness and truth in our own lives so that we can be pure vessels of honor for Him and of prayer toward Him...it is NOW!
I wish the times were simpler. I wish the dark storm clouds were not mounting up. I wish the "winds of war" were not picking up as they are. I wish we could just have a sweet little Sunday School lesson, say "nice things" and go home and take a nap! But sadly, that is not the truth!
As we read the headlines, listen to the television reports, read the internet by-lines, only an ostrich could fail to see the 'handwriting on the wall." We are in for an unpleasant time around the world, and the protected nation in which we live and abide in "peace and freedom" has been drawn into the fray!
We who are Christians must come forth to lift up our voices in prayer in this hour! God has called His people to awaken! He wants us to rise up, to be alert, watching in prayer with our spirits, and to begin to help Him sound the alarm that Jesus is coming! As the people of God, we must be ready! We must be willing to answer every call that He sends forth in these perilous days!
I have often written on a subject to which I "hear" God calling to us, His People: "AWAKE! ARISE! ALERT! ALARM!" and it still stands today. God is calling each of us to answer that call in our hearts! The deeper we get to the times of peril and turmoil we are hearing about through the news media, the more obvious the message is to everyone. We are seeing and hearing of many "End Time" scenarios in our news reports today!
In 1990, the Lord gave me four separate dreams of FIRE! In each one, I was in a burning building and I was trying to get people out before it consumed them. In every dream I warned, sounded alarms, pled, begged people to hear, and NONE would listen to me at that time! They ignored me, my urgent pleas, and imperative alarms. They pushed me away. They laughed at me for believing that there was a fire, much less that they were in actual danger. They were eating and drinking and reveling in a party mood, never accepting the truth of their impending doom!
Heartbroken, I went away sorrowful for their souls; for I knew how real this danger was and how much the "alarm" was needed! I have cried many tears in these last 14 years over those "visions" and His imperative "words" spoken to my spirit , for they were from the mouth of Almighty God! Yet the people in the dreams were deaf and blind to the truth of His "alarm"! How He longs for people to "wake up" and get away from the danger of not living close to Him and come to the safety of being obediently under the shelter of His Wings.
It was after these 3 sobering dreams, each coming over the period of a year, that I received the AWAKE! ARISE! ALERT! ALARM! word in a night of prayer! It was as if the Spirit of the Lord emblazoned this thought in my heart...and it has never left me, all these years! I recorded these piercing words in a personal journal and have often spoken them to Christians in the arenas of influence which I have been given. Each word is a call to action...and each word expects a response from the people of God!
Recently, the Lord impressed my heart again with these things, so I obediently raise this banner once again. He told me to open my mouth and give out that which He has given me and to begin calling forth "Release" to His people....to begin to OBEY Him in responding to His Spirit in these things.
His specific words were these: "Speak life! Release My Spirit in others. Watch as floodgates come down in people's lives, and My Spirit will flow out of their walled up hearts - many years of holding back and now they shall begin to flow in that which I have called them unto!"
"For the calling I have given you is a HOLY ONE, and NOW is the time in this darkest hour on earth to date for My Glory to begin covering the earth as the waters cover the sea. And it will be as My people begin to be released and give out that which I have faithfully given them that My waters shall cover the earth! Against the backdrop of world turmoil, My Word and My Light will shine increasingly unto an everlasting Day!"
May each of us be watching and listening in our hearts to what the Spirit of the Lord is speaking to us today. He will never speak to us anything He has not spoken in His written Word, for it is the foundation of our faith and our instructions for living.
Our God is calling and saying..."I want YOU!"
He is calling each of us to be obedient to the seeds of truth He, Himself, has planted there. Whatever He has asked of you, be it large or small..."Just DO IT"! Don't let the world "out-do" us with their Nike commercials!
When Jesus comes again, may He find us faithfull DOING the things He has sown in our hearts over the years.
Looking Unto Jesus,
Sandy Brunson
10.12.2006
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
History's Dangerous Repetition
It would seem that Karl Marx got things backwards. History does not repeat itself first as tragedy and then as farce. Rather, it repeats itself first as farce and second as tragedy. This, perhaps more than anything else is the conclusion one should reach from North Korea's nuclear test on Columbus Day.
It was the Clinton administration, which back in the Roaring '90s began the policy of appeasing North Korea. Throughout the decade the US wined and dined the North Korean Stalinists who always responded by pocketing US concessions and escalating their nuclear and ballistic missile activities and threats against the US and its Asian allies.
The farce was then US secretary of state Madeleine Albright's visit to Pyongyang in late October 2000, two weeks before the US presidential elections. There, after the North Koreans tested the Taepo-Dong 1 ballistic missile off the coast of Japan in 1998 and refused to end either their missile programs or missile exports to Iran, Albright tripped the night fantastic with Kim Jong-Il. Her buffoonery was a perfect capstone to eight years of the Clinton administration's addiction to ceremony over substance.
While America's tone towards North Korea chilled under the Bush administration, there was little substantive change in its policies.
Secretary of state Colin Powell met with his North Korean counterpart Pak Nam Sun and to this day US attempts to strike a deal with Pyongyang have not ended. And now, Pyongyang, with its medium- and long-range ballistic missiles, has tested a nuclear bomb.
THERE IS of course also North Korea's ally Iran. Toward Iran, too, the substance of the Bush administration policies is little different from that of his predecessor. Like North Korea, the Iranians respond to US attempts at appeasement by escalating their rhetoric and redoubling their offensive military build-ups of missiles and nuclear capabilities.
The great shift, then which occurred under the Bush administration, a shift for which President George W. Bush has been pilloried by his political rivals, has been rhetorical.
While hypocritical, the division between rhetoric and substance has something to recommend it. The benefit of the current US position toward North Korea and Iran is that the rhetoric has left open the possibility that the policy itself will finally be suited to reality. Today, unlike the situation in the 1990s, the American public is at least aware that these states are a threat to US national security interests.
In the aftermath of North Korea's nuclear bomb test, the US can support military actions by Japan and South Korea against North Korea; build up its missile shield; and perhaps end its 14 year self-imposed moratorium on nuclear testing and so revamp its nuclear arsenal.
Were the Bush administration to change its policy tomorrow regarding Iran — begin shaming Europe into ending its appeasement, and threatening Russia with trade sanctions if Moscow continues supporting Iran, Syria and Hizbullah, while building up its military options to strike at Iran's nuclear installations — the American public would understand why the policy change was necessary. Indeed, such a move could even help the Republican Party in the upcoming elections.
DISTURBINGLY, WHILE Bush has paved the way rhetorically for a shift in policy toward North Korea and Iran, he has done no such thing in the US's relations with the terror-ruled Palestinian Authority. And as is the case with Iran and North Korea, the stubborn and ill-considered continuation of the Clinton administration's appeasement policy toward the PA during the Bush years has only exacerbated and escalated the threat posed by the PA to US national security interests and to the national security of US allies — first and foremost, of Israel.
In the 1990s, the father of modern terrorism, Yasser Arafat, was the most frequent foreign visitor at the White House. The head of the PLO was the object of adoration by the Clintonites. It didn't matter to them that Arafat never revoked the PLO Charter calling for Israel's destruction. It didn't matter that he indoctrinated a generation of Palestinian children to become suicide bombers in jihad against the Jews. It didn't matter that he used billions of dollars of American and European taxpayer money to build the largest terror army in the world. Arafat showed up at signing ceremonies. He was the poster child of appeasement.
The Clinton administration tied itself to a policy toward the Palestinians which, like its policies toward North Korea and Iran, opened it to ever escalating blackmail. As the terror threat emanating from the PA-ruled areas rose, empowering Arafat became the obsession of the Clinton White House. He was showered with money, guns and love. No Israeli security consideration could hold a candle to the need to strengthen Arafat.
From bombing to bombing, Arafat was enriched and empowered. Israel's security became the main obstacle to the signing ceremonies.
After seven years, the myth of Arafat the peacemaker exploded in the faces of more than a thousand Israelis who would be killed over the next six years of the Palestinian jihad. But the myth of the PA endured.
For the past six years, each bombing, every clear indication that the PA itself is a terrorist entity is met by more breathless US protestations of support for Palestinian empowerment and statehood. The fact that the last six years have left the State Department unfazed was made absolutely clear during Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit last week.
Since Arafat appointed Mahmoud Abbas, his deputy of 40 years, PA prime minister in 2003, the US has upheld Abbas as a man of peace, a moderate and a respectable leader that the Bush administration wishes to strengthen. To this end, the Bush administration has overlooked Abbas's clear support for terrorism. It has excused his constant appeals to merge his Fatah terror group with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It has ignored the fact that his Fatah terror group has committed more acts of terror than Hamas and that Fatah's involvement in terror and the sophistication of its attacks has only increased since Abbas replaced Arafat after the latter's death in November 2004.
During her visit last week, at Abbas's request, Rice was scheduled to meet with Fatah commander Hussein a-Sheikh in the American Consulate-General in Jerusalem. The meeting was cancelled at the last minute when Israeli activists demanded that Sheikh, who was directly responsible for the murder of dozens of Israelis and several American nationals, be arrested by Israel police upon arrival at the consulate. Yet, Rice still met with other Fatah leaders, like Muhammad Dahlan who has been directly implicated in the murder of Israelis in terror attacks perpetrated by men under his command.
EVEN MORE disturbingly, Rice has officially sanctioned a policy put together by US Army Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton to expand by up to 70 percent Abbas's presidential guard and personal army, Force 17. The administration wishes to raise some $20 million to fund the training and arming and expansion of Abbas's army from 3,500 to 6,000 soldiers. This move comes after the US transferred 3,000 rifles and 1 million bullets to Force 17 in June. Yet Force 17 is a terrorist army led by terrorists.
Right after he received the weapons shipment, Abbas appointed Mahmoud Damra commander of the force. Damra, who like many of the Force 17 officers and soldiers, doubles as a Fatah terrorist, was wanted by Israel due to his direct involvement in the terrorist murder of at least 15 Israelis. One of his deputies claimed that the US rifles were immediately used to attack a bus carrying Israeli school girls in Judea.
Israel arrested Damra at a checkpoint shortly after he received Abbas's appointment. The US immediately began pressuring Israel to release him.
In addition to Damra's direct involvement in Fatah terror, he also has close ties with Iran and Hizb'allah. In 2002, Arafat reportedly appointed him Force 17's liaison officer to Iran and Hizb'allah forces. The fact that Abbas appointed Damra Force 17's overall commander just weeks before Fatah and Hamas began Iran's proxy war against Israel by attacking the IDF position at Kerem Shalom and kidnapping Cpl. Gilad Shalit, should say something about Abbas's intentions. Yet, last week, Rice couldn't praise Abbas enough.
North Korea's nuclear test and Iran's nuclear intimidation show us what happens when failed policies are not abandoned. Due in part to its continued US-backed legitimacy, the PA is used by Pakistan as an excuse for terror sponsorship and nuclear proliferation and by jihadists throughout the world as justification for attacks on Western and Jewish targets.
No doubt the North Korean nuclear test is a turning point in this world war.
The question is whether it will force the US to finally part with appeasement, or whether Rice will convince President Bush to take his chances by repeating history a third and fourth time.
Jewish World Review
10.10.2006
It was the Clinton administration, which back in the Roaring '90s began the policy of appeasing North Korea. Throughout the decade the US wined and dined the North Korean Stalinists who always responded by pocketing US concessions and escalating their nuclear and ballistic missile activities and threats against the US and its Asian allies.
The farce was then US secretary of state Madeleine Albright's visit to Pyongyang in late October 2000, two weeks before the US presidential elections. There, after the North Koreans tested the Taepo-Dong 1 ballistic missile off the coast of Japan in 1998 and refused to end either their missile programs or missile exports to Iran, Albright tripped the night fantastic with Kim Jong-Il. Her buffoonery was a perfect capstone to eight years of the Clinton administration's addiction to ceremony over substance.
While America's tone towards North Korea chilled under the Bush administration, there was little substantive change in its policies.
Secretary of state Colin Powell met with his North Korean counterpart Pak Nam Sun and to this day US attempts to strike a deal with Pyongyang have not ended. And now, Pyongyang, with its medium- and long-range ballistic missiles, has tested a nuclear bomb.
THERE IS of course also North Korea's ally Iran. Toward Iran, too, the substance of the Bush administration policies is little different from that of his predecessor. Like North Korea, the Iranians respond to US attempts at appeasement by escalating their rhetoric and redoubling their offensive military build-ups of missiles and nuclear capabilities.
The great shift, then which occurred under the Bush administration, a shift for which President George W. Bush has been pilloried by his political rivals, has been rhetorical.
While hypocritical, the division between rhetoric and substance has something to recommend it. The benefit of the current US position toward North Korea and Iran is that the rhetoric has left open the possibility that the policy itself will finally be suited to reality. Today, unlike the situation in the 1990s, the American public is at least aware that these states are a threat to US national security interests.
In the aftermath of North Korea's nuclear bomb test, the US can support military actions by Japan and South Korea against North Korea; build up its missile shield; and perhaps end its 14 year self-imposed moratorium on nuclear testing and so revamp its nuclear arsenal.
Were the Bush administration to change its policy tomorrow regarding Iran — begin shaming Europe into ending its appeasement, and threatening Russia with trade sanctions if Moscow continues supporting Iran, Syria and Hizbullah, while building up its military options to strike at Iran's nuclear installations — the American public would understand why the policy change was necessary. Indeed, such a move could even help the Republican Party in the upcoming elections.
DISTURBINGLY, WHILE Bush has paved the way rhetorically for a shift in policy toward North Korea and Iran, he has done no such thing in the US's relations with the terror-ruled Palestinian Authority. And as is the case with Iran and North Korea, the stubborn and ill-considered continuation of the Clinton administration's appeasement policy toward the PA during the Bush years has only exacerbated and escalated the threat posed by the PA to US national security interests and to the national security of US allies — first and foremost, of Israel.
In the 1990s, the father of modern terrorism, Yasser Arafat, was the most frequent foreign visitor at the White House. The head of the PLO was the object of adoration by the Clintonites. It didn't matter to them that Arafat never revoked the PLO Charter calling for Israel's destruction. It didn't matter that he indoctrinated a generation of Palestinian children to become suicide bombers in jihad against the Jews. It didn't matter that he used billions of dollars of American and European taxpayer money to build the largest terror army in the world. Arafat showed up at signing ceremonies. He was the poster child of appeasement.
The Clinton administration tied itself to a policy toward the Palestinians which, like its policies toward North Korea and Iran, opened it to ever escalating blackmail. As the terror threat emanating from the PA-ruled areas rose, empowering Arafat became the obsession of the Clinton White House. He was showered with money, guns and love. No Israeli security consideration could hold a candle to the need to strengthen Arafat.
From bombing to bombing, Arafat was enriched and empowered. Israel's security became the main obstacle to the signing ceremonies.
After seven years, the myth of Arafat the peacemaker exploded in the faces of more than a thousand Israelis who would be killed over the next six years of the Palestinian jihad. But the myth of the PA endured.
For the past six years, each bombing, every clear indication that the PA itself is a terrorist entity is met by more breathless US protestations of support for Palestinian empowerment and statehood. The fact that the last six years have left the State Department unfazed was made absolutely clear during Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit last week.
Since Arafat appointed Mahmoud Abbas, his deputy of 40 years, PA prime minister in 2003, the US has upheld Abbas as a man of peace, a moderate and a respectable leader that the Bush administration wishes to strengthen. To this end, the Bush administration has overlooked Abbas's clear support for terrorism. It has excused his constant appeals to merge his Fatah terror group with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It has ignored the fact that his Fatah terror group has committed more acts of terror than Hamas and that Fatah's involvement in terror and the sophistication of its attacks has only increased since Abbas replaced Arafat after the latter's death in November 2004.
During her visit last week, at Abbas's request, Rice was scheduled to meet with Fatah commander Hussein a-Sheikh in the American Consulate-General in Jerusalem. The meeting was cancelled at the last minute when Israeli activists demanded that Sheikh, who was directly responsible for the murder of dozens of Israelis and several American nationals, be arrested by Israel police upon arrival at the consulate. Yet, Rice still met with other Fatah leaders, like Muhammad Dahlan who has been directly implicated in the murder of Israelis in terror attacks perpetrated by men under his command.
EVEN MORE disturbingly, Rice has officially sanctioned a policy put together by US Army Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton to expand by up to 70 percent Abbas's presidential guard and personal army, Force 17. The administration wishes to raise some $20 million to fund the training and arming and expansion of Abbas's army from 3,500 to 6,000 soldiers. This move comes after the US transferred 3,000 rifles and 1 million bullets to Force 17 in June. Yet Force 17 is a terrorist army led by terrorists.
Right after he received the weapons shipment, Abbas appointed Mahmoud Damra commander of the force. Damra, who like many of the Force 17 officers and soldiers, doubles as a Fatah terrorist, was wanted by Israel due to his direct involvement in the terrorist murder of at least 15 Israelis. One of his deputies claimed that the US rifles were immediately used to attack a bus carrying Israeli school girls in Judea.
Israel arrested Damra at a checkpoint shortly after he received Abbas's appointment. The US immediately began pressuring Israel to release him.
In addition to Damra's direct involvement in Fatah terror, he also has close ties with Iran and Hizb'allah. In 2002, Arafat reportedly appointed him Force 17's liaison officer to Iran and Hizb'allah forces. The fact that Abbas appointed Damra Force 17's overall commander just weeks before Fatah and Hamas began Iran's proxy war against Israel by attacking the IDF position at Kerem Shalom and kidnapping Cpl. Gilad Shalit, should say something about Abbas's intentions. Yet, last week, Rice couldn't praise Abbas enough.
North Korea's nuclear test and Iran's nuclear intimidation show us what happens when failed policies are not abandoned. Due in part to its continued US-backed legitimacy, the PA is used by Pakistan as an excuse for terror sponsorship and nuclear proliferation and by jihadists throughout the world as justification for attacks on Western and Jewish targets.
No doubt the North Korean nuclear test is a turning point in this world war.
The question is whether it will force the US to finally part with appeasement, or whether Rice will convince President Bush to take his chances by repeating history a third and fourth time.
Jewish World Review
10.10.2006
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Gush Etzion Celebrates - Fears For Its Future
Yochanan Ben-Yaakov doesn't remember his father, who was killed defending Kfar Etzion in 1948.
Nor does the silver-haired man recall the home there where he spent his first three years until he was evacuated with the other children, also in 1948.
But he has lived his life as if he had.
On the strength of his mother's memories and those of their friends and former neighbors, he was among the 15 young adults who resettled the religious kibbutz in 1967, three months after it was returned to Jewish hands in the Six Day War.
Here in the hills outside Jerusalem he has built his home and raised six children. While he remains confident that it will stay in Israeli hands, he participated Monday in an event initiated by the Religious Kibbutz Movement designed to tell the High Court of Justice that Jews throughout the country feel a connection to Gush Etzion, where close to 40,000 Israelis now live.
Heading into the 40th year of the resettlement of Gush Etzion, the Religious Kibbutz Movement had planned to hold a solidarity event there last April, in advance of a petition to the High Court regarding the security barrier's route there.
The Kibbutz Movement and Gush Etzion's leaders are concerned that if the court rules in favor of the petition submitted by neighboring Palestinians, it could endanger the area's future status, even though, according to them, there is a consensus among Israelis that the area should be included within the state's permanent borders.
The April event was canceled due to an outbreak of bird flu. Since then, the High Court has heard the petition and a ruling is pending.
The Religious Kibbutz Movement decided to hold the event on Monday, to celebrate the continued Jewish presence in the area.
Some 2,000 kibbutzniks came from all over the country to hike, visit the winery and listen to songs, skits and speeches at a closing ceremony in Kfar Etzion.
Speakers spoke of the 240 residents who were killed in 1948 and the growth that has occurred since Jews returned after 19 years of Jordanian rule.
Shaul Goldstein, head of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, said he wished that those who lost their lives defending the area could return to see how it had blossomed.
Former MK Hanan Porat, who lives in Kfar Etzion and like Ben-Yaakov, was born there and returned in 1967, spoke of the need to prevent any further territorial withdrawal. He told the audience that there should never be another disengagement like the one in August 2005 when some 8,500 Jews were evicted from their homes in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria.
Both Goldstein and Yair Reinman, the executive director of the Religious Kibbutz Movement, said that despite the support the Gush Etzion bloc enjoys from the public and the fact that the government speaks of retaining it in any final status agreement, they do not feel their future is totally secure.
Only last week, Kadima Minister Meir Sheetrit spoke of using the Saudi plan approved by the Arab League in 2002, which calls for a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders, as a basis for talks with moderate Arab leaders.
"I fear parts of it [Gush Etzion] could be given away," said Reinman.
"I am not sure about anything," said Goldstein. "There is a fear that once one starts to surrender one will continue to surrender," he said.
Ben-Yaakov said he had faith that he was home for good after his family had endured so much both in Israel and in Eastern Europe.
Sitting on a plastic chair on a lawn filled with visitors, he described how his grandfather was killed in a pogrom when his father, Yaakov, was only three years old. As young adults, his father and uncle immigrated to Israel; the rest of their family was killed in the Holocaust, including their five sisters.
Instead the two men were killed in Kfar Etzion. Ben-Yaakov said that to keep his father's memory alive, he his took his first name as his last name.
Just like Diaspora Jews grew up on stories of Jerusalem and Israel, he grew up on stories of how he would one day return to Gush Etzion.
Now that the Jews are thriving here, it won't be given away, he said. "I have a personal promise from [former prime ministers Menachem] Begin and [Yitzhak] Rabin to that effect," he said.
He still trusts those pledges, he said.
Jerusalem Post
10.10.2006
Nor does the silver-haired man recall the home there where he spent his first three years until he was evacuated with the other children, also in 1948.
But he has lived his life as if he had.
On the strength of his mother's memories and those of their friends and former neighbors, he was among the 15 young adults who resettled the religious kibbutz in 1967, three months after it was returned to Jewish hands in the Six Day War.
Here in the hills outside Jerusalem he has built his home and raised six children. While he remains confident that it will stay in Israeli hands, he participated Monday in an event initiated by the Religious Kibbutz Movement designed to tell the High Court of Justice that Jews throughout the country feel a connection to Gush Etzion, where close to 40,000 Israelis now live.
Heading into the 40th year of the resettlement of Gush Etzion, the Religious Kibbutz Movement had planned to hold a solidarity event there last April, in advance of a petition to the High Court regarding the security barrier's route there.
The Kibbutz Movement and Gush Etzion's leaders are concerned that if the court rules in favor of the petition submitted by neighboring Palestinians, it could endanger the area's future status, even though, according to them, there is a consensus among Israelis that the area should be included within the state's permanent borders.
The April event was canceled due to an outbreak of bird flu. Since then, the High Court has heard the petition and a ruling is pending.
The Religious Kibbutz Movement decided to hold the event on Monday, to celebrate the continued Jewish presence in the area.
Some 2,000 kibbutzniks came from all over the country to hike, visit the winery and listen to songs, skits and speeches at a closing ceremony in Kfar Etzion.
Speakers spoke of the 240 residents who were killed in 1948 and the growth that has occurred since Jews returned after 19 years of Jordanian rule.
Shaul Goldstein, head of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, said he wished that those who lost their lives defending the area could return to see how it had blossomed.
Former MK Hanan Porat, who lives in Kfar Etzion and like Ben-Yaakov, was born there and returned in 1967, spoke of the need to prevent any further territorial withdrawal. He told the audience that there should never be another disengagement like the one in August 2005 when some 8,500 Jews were evicted from their homes in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria.
Both Goldstein and Yair Reinman, the executive director of the Religious Kibbutz Movement, said that despite the support the Gush Etzion bloc enjoys from the public and the fact that the government speaks of retaining it in any final status agreement, they do not feel their future is totally secure.
Only last week, Kadima Minister Meir Sheetrit spoke of using the Saudi plan approved by the Arab League in 2002, which calls for a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders, as a basis for talks with moderate Arab leaders.
"I fear parts of it [Gush Etzion] could be given away," said Reinman.
"I am not sure about anything," said Goldstein. "There is a fear that once one starts to surrender one will continue to surrender," he said.
Ben-Yaakov said he had faith that he was home for good after his family had endured so much both in Israel and in Eastern Europe.
Sitting on a plastic chair on a lawn filled with visitors, he described how his grandfather was killed in a pogrom when his father, Yaakov, was only three years old. As young adults, his father and uncle immigrated to Israel; the rest of their family was killed in the Holocaust, including their five sisters.
Instead the two men were killed in Kfar Etzion. Ben-Yaakov said that to keep his father's memory alive, he his took his first name as his last name.
Just like Diaspora Jews grew up on stories of Jerusalem and Israel, he grew up on stories of how he would one day return to Gush Etzion.
Now that the Jews are thriving here, it won't be given away, he said. "I have a personal promise from [former prime ministers Menachem] Begin and [Yitzhak] Rabin to that effect," he said.
He still trusts those pledges, he said.
Jerusalem Post
10.10.2006
Monday, October 09, 2006
Hitler Promotes Brazilian Dentists
A picture of a smiling Adolf Hitler popped up on billboards rented by a chain of dental clinics a few days ago in the Brazilian capital.
The Nazi leader was chosen from a list of figures well-known throughout the world in order to advertise for the dental clinics under the slogan, "A smile can change the world." President Bush was also among the public figures chosen for the ad campaign.
Israeli Ambassador to Brazil Tzipora Rimon was appalled to see the billboards featuring Hitler and his smile and did not hesitate to call the owner of the company to notify him that the billboards hurt Israel and the Jewish people.
The owner was surprised by the telephone conversation. He apologized, admitted that he made a mistake and gave instructions to immediately remove the advertisements.
Y Net News
10.09.2006
The Nazi leader was chosen from a list of figures well-known throughout the world in order to advertise for the dental clinics under the slogan, "A smile can change the world." President Bush was also among the public figures chosen for the ad campaign.
Israeli Ambassador to Brazil Tzipora Rimon was appalled to see the billboards featuring Hitler and his smile and did not hesitate to call the owner of the company to notify him that the billboards hurt Israel and the Jewish people.
The owner was surprised by the telephone conversation. He apologized, admitted that he made a mistake and gave instructions to immediately remove the advertisements.
Y Net News
10.09.2006
Sunday, October 08, 2006
The Fertility Of Succot
The celebration of Succot has to be the most enjoyable of the three pilgrimage festivals. The Torah commands this by emphasizing the concept of simha (joy), one has to be "altogether joyful" when celebrating this festival (Deut. 16:15). As Succot comes in the autumn, it can certainly be considered as a joyous harvest festival.
It is the time when the harvest is in, when the countryman can relax, sit in his garden booth and admire the crops stored in his granary and fruit basket. He has donated his first-fruits to the priests and the Temple, and the remainder is his, for him and his family to live on until the new crop is gathered in before next autumn.
Thus it is a time of satisfaction and rejoicing, but the canny farmer will know that he has now to prepare for the next season, to see to it that next year's crop will succeed as well as the present one, or if that was not too good, to seek an improvement in the coming year. How is he to do that? His main concern will be for the fertility of the soil and for the right weather. The rains have not yet started but he needs them very soon and then to continue on and off till Pessah, the next pilgrimage festival that comes in the spring.
During that time he has to clear the ground, to plow and to sow, to prune and to plant. But it is not all in his hands.
FERTILITY OF the soil and the right kind of weather are not functions of his hard work; he needs to have the hand of God working for him. It is all very well to fulfill the commandments, but will that ensure fertility and good rains as God has promised? The farmer cannot be sure and so he will seek to do what he can to secure the future, and the symbols of Succot will come to his aid.
He is to sit in his booth, to take his meals there and to sleep there. Why? To remind him that the Children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt, lived in succot (booths, Lev. 23:43).
But did they? The Torah says quite clearly elsewhere that they lived in tents and not booths made of palm branches. Thus one of the rabbis of the Talmud, R. Eliezer ben Hyrkanus, says (Succa 11B) the booths refer indirectly to the "clouds of glory" that protected the Israelites throughout the Wilderness. At the end of the desert episode these divine clouds disappeared, so how can they now help our farmer on his piece of land in Israel?
The succa, however, has other overtones. On the one hand it can be a small temporary hut that gives shade, as it did to Jonah after the debacle of Nineveh (Jonah 4:5); while on the other hand, it represents the everlasting dynasty of the Royal House of David which, as predicted by the prophet Amos (9:11), will once again rule over Israel. The succa is a structure that is both humble and majestic, both temporary and permanent, and one can safely say that it represents the fragile Jewish home, whether it be modest or not.
THE SECOND ritual that the farmer is urged to perform is to take four plants (Lev. 23:40), the lulav (palm) group consisting of the palm branch, the myrtle and the willow, together with the etrog (citrus) fruit, and wave them to the four points of the compass, as well as upwards and downwards, before the Lord.
Clearly they are a precursor of the fine fruits that the farmer hopes to gather in the coming year, and they are all signs of the future fertility of his land. But how will all this help the poor man in the coming year? In order for the farmer to practice these rites, he must first have confidence in their effectiveness. Today we city-dwellers carry out the rituals in a mechanical manner and give them all sorts of metaphysical interpretations, but to the Israelite farmer they were meant as practical expressions of a religion that would lead to results, and they had to give him results if he was going to repeat them year after year.
To make these rituals believable to the farmer, one can show that they were rooted in earlier symbolism, much of it lost on us today. One basic idea was the power of the tree for fertility, and the notion of the tree permeates the idea of Succot. It is present in three of the plants of the lulav group held in the hand, and in the tree cuttings that are used for the s'chach (roof covering) of the succa itself.
The power of the tree is such that two cherubim (angels) and a flaming sword had to be set by God to stop the way to the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden. Abraham sat under an ancient oak tree when God appeared to him, and He appeared to Moses from an arboreal bush. In ancient Mesopotamia, the power of the Emperor Ashurnasirpal II is shown in his role as Master of the Sacred Tree, for which he is being anointed by a genie with a citron-shaped cone dipped in liquid, as depicted at biblical Kalah (Nimrud), in the ninth century BCE.
The Jewish attitude to the magical tree is ambivalent. The Torah forbids an Asherah tree to be planted next to a local altar (Deut. 16:21; it seems to have been a kind of live totem pole) and it was condemned as a sign of idol worship. On the other hand the Book of Proverbs (3:18) tells us that Wisdom "is a Tree of Life to those that cling to her." The Rabbis take Wisdom to mean the Torah itself, and the quotation graces the front of many synagogue arks. Whichever way we consider such a tree, we see it as having special powers of fruitfulness and endurance, powers appreciated by and necessary to the farmer.
AS FOR the succa itself, as we have seen, it is not really a representation of the dwellings in the Wilderness, which were tents, but rather it is symbolic of the Jewish home, perhaps in a temporary form.
It is the woman who rules the home, as expressed in the talmudic term for wife as debaitha, "she of the house," just like the English word "housewife." When it comes down to the Israelite farmer, the succa represents his wife, and she was of course the important element in the fertility of the family, and indeed of the land as well.
A barren wife, so often depicted as a figure of misery in the Tanach (Hebrew Bible), was considered to be casting a blight on the fertility of the farm and flocks of her husband. That is why she always had to entreat God for a child, to save her and her husband's prosperity. For the good of the next year's harvest, it was essential that the wife reproduce successfully and thus guarantee a good crop in the coming year. Succot was the time for this endeavour and it was expressed in visual and symbolic form.
There can be no clearer visual symbolism than the shaking of the lulav (the palm branch and its associated fruits) in the succa. When you see the lulav group, the rigid lance-like palm branch surrounded by the two bushy branches and the cone-shaped etrog, who can doubt that it represents the male organ, and to see it waved vigorously in six directions within the succa womb, that really is the ultimate fertility symbol of Succot
Soup Kitchens Gear Up For Special Succot Meals
Last year, Ya'acov (not his real name), his wife and his two young daughters spent Succot at the soup kitchen of Hazon Yeshaya in Jerusalem. For the family, living below the poverty line and relying on government benefits to get by, it was their seventh year receiving food donations from one of the country's largest humanitarian aid organizations.
"[My daughters] grew up at Hazon Yeshaya," he explains. "We all went there to eat.
"It is very easy for a person to fall between the cracks," adds Ya'acov, describing how his wife got sick, then he was fired from his job and suddenly the family had to rely on others to feed them. "But if people really want to, they can learn how to get out of a desperate situation. They have to learn to take advantage of what is on offer around them."
Throughout the years that he visited the center for food, Ya'acov said he also volunteered in the kitchen until eventually he gained enough confidence to take a course to become a professional chef. "I could see how much pressure the kitchen staff was under. People were waiting a really long time for their food, so I decided to help them out."
It wasn't easy at first, recalls Ya'acov. "But the kitchen staff encouraged me and told me to give it a try. They said if I helped out it would give me the confidence to continue."
The 39-year-old finally qualified a little less than a year ago, and three months ago he found work in a Jerusalem hotel. This Succot, Ya'acov says, even though his family no longer needs the services of Hazon Yeshaya, he will again volunteer during his free days.
By doing so, he has become one of thousands of volunteers who will offer their services this year during Succot at various soup kitchens and outreach centers around the country for many different non-profit organizations.
According to the National Insurance Institute's recently released poverty report, 26.2% of Israelis, more than 1.6 million people, lived below the poverty line in 2005. And a spokesman for the Ministry of Social Affairs estimated Thursday that three thousand people live on Israel's streets.
"Succot is meant to be a happy time, a time when the Jews in the desert were protected as a nation," says Moshe Lefkowitz, director of Meir Panim, another non-profit organization devoted to feeding and caring for Israel's needy. "While a country cannot provide that kind of warmth, a neighbor can, and the role of the individual during this time is to give love and help the weaker people in society."
Both Meir Panim and Hazon Yeshaya have built succot at their centers to ensure that those in need have at least one festive meal during the holiday. Lefkowitz estimates that more than 6,000 people will be fed during the holiday at one of Meir Panim's 15 succot.
At Hazon Yeshaya, founder and CEO Avraham Israel says that a quarter of a million hot meals are prepared each month for its 38 distribution centers around the country.
"It is important for these people to feel the harmony and joy of the holiday," continues Israel. "If we don't do these things then it will feel like any other day of the year. We are Jewish people and we should celebrate the holidays properly."
Twelve succot have been built by the organization, with the one in Jerusalem set to host more than 500 people like Ya'acov, who is now giving back to the organization that helped him and his family.
"I try to return and help whenever I can," he says. "I know how to repay kindness."
As a recipient of free hot meals at the soup kitchen, he noticed the overwhelming burden facing the kitchen staff. "The media do not know what really goes on there," says Ya'acov. "They say they do but they don't and the politicians live in a different world. None of them know what it's like to stand in a line for hours to receive food."
Israel and Lefkowitz highlight the growing poverty among citizens in the North of the country following this summer's war.
"The situation in the North is adding more poverty to this country," says Israel, adding that 12 more Hazon Yeshaya centers are set to open in the coming months. "Since the war many people have lost their jobs or gone out of business, unemployment in that region is almost double of what it is elsewhere in the country."
His comments are backed up by figures collected by organizations such as Latet, which oversees distribution of food packages to more than 100 aid organizations around the country, indicating increases of at least 27% in the number of people requesting aid compared to last year.
Jerusalem Post10.08.2006
It is the time when the harvest is in, when the countryman can relax, sit in his garden booth and admire the crops stored in his granary and fruit basket. He has donated his first-fruits to the priests and the Temple, and the remainder is his, for him and his family to live on until the new crop is gathered in before next autumn.
Thus it is a time of satisfaction and rejoicing, but the canny farmer will know that he has now to prepare for the next season, to see to it that next year's crop will succeed as well as the present one, or if that was not too good, to seek an improvement in the coming year. How is he to do that? His main concern will be for the fertility of the soil and for the right weather. The rains have not yet started but he needs them very soon and then to continue on and off till Pessah, the next pilgrimage festival that comes in the spring.
During that time he has to clear the ground, to plow and to sow, to prune and to plant. But it is not all in his hands.
FERTILITY OF the soil and the right kind of weather are not functions of his hard work; he needs to have the hand of God working for him. It is all very well to fulfill the commandments, but will that ensure fertility and good rains as God has promised? The farmer cannot be sure and so he will seek to do what he can to secure the future, and the symbols of Succot will come to his aid.
He is to sit in his booth, to take his meals there and to sleep there. Why? To remind him that the Children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt, lived in succot (booths, Lev. 23:43).
But did they? The Torah says quite clearly elsewhere that they lived in tents and not booths made of palm branches. Thus one of the rabbis of the Talmud, R. Eliezer ben Hyrkanus, says (Succa 11B) the booths refer indirectly to the "clouds of glory" that protected the Israelites throughout the Wilderness. At the end of the desert episode these divine clouds disappeared, so how can they now help our farmer on his piece of land in Israel?
The succa, however, has other overtones. On the one hand it can be a small temporary hut that gives shade, as it did to Jonah after the debacle of Nineveh (Jonah 4:5); while on the other hand, it represents the everlasting dynasty of the Royal House of David which, as predicted by the prophet Amos (9:11), will once again rule over Israel. The succa is a structure that is both humble and majestic, both temporary and permanent, and one can safely say that it represents the fragile Jewish home, whether it be modest or not.
THE SECOND ritual that the farmer is urged to perform is to take four plants (Lev. 23:40), the lulav (palm) group consisting of the palm branch, the myrtle and the willow, together with the etrog (citrus) fruit, and wave them to the four points of the compass, as well as upwards and downwards, before the Lord.
Clearly they are a precursor of the fine fruits that the farmer hopes to gather in the coming year, and they are all signs of the future fertility of his land. But how will all this help the poor man in the coming year? In order for the farmer to practice these rites, he must first have confidence in their effectiveness. Today we city-dwellers carry out the rituals in a mechanical manner and give them all sorts of metaphysical interpretations, but to the Israelite farmer they were meant as practical expressions of a religion that would lead to results, and they had to give him results if he was going to repeat them year after year.
To make these rituals believable to the farmer, one can show that they were rooted in earlier symbolism, much of it lost on us today. One basic idea was the power of the tree for fertility, and the notion of the tree permeates the idea of Succot. It is present in three of the plants of the lulav group held in the hand, and in the tree cuttings that are used for the s'chach (roof covering) of the succa itself.
The power of the tree is such that two cherubim (angels) and a flaming sword had to be set by God to stop the way to the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden. Abraham sat under an ancient oak tree when God appeared to him, and He appeared to Moses from an arboreal bush. In ancient Mesopotamia, the power of the Emperor Ashurnasirpal II is shown in his role as Master of the Sacred Tree, for which he is being anointed by a genie with a citron-shaped cone dipped in liquid, as depicted at biblical Kalah (Nimrud), in the ninth century BCE.
The Jewish attitude to the magical tree is ambivalent. The Torah forbids an Asherah tree to be planted next to a local altar (Deut. 16:21; it seems to have been a kind of live totem pole) and it was condemned as a sign of idol worship. On the other hand the Book of Proverbs (3:18) tells us that Wisdom "is a Tree of Life to those that cling to her." The Rabbis take Wisdom to mean the Torah itself, and the quotation graces the front of many synagogue arks. Whichever way we consider such a tree, we see it as having special powers of fruitfulness and endurance, powers appreciated by and necessary to the farmer.
AS FOR the succa itself, as we have seen, it is not really a representation of the dwellings in the Wilderness, which were tents, but rather it is symbolic of the Jewish home, perhaps in a temporary form.
It is the woman who rules the home, as expressed in the talmudic term for wife as debaitha, "she of the house," just like the English word "housewife." When it comes down to the Israelite farmer, the succa represents his wife, and she was of course the important element in the fertility of the family, and indeed of the land as well.
A barren wife, so often depicted as a figure of misery in the Tanach (Hebrew Bible), was considered to be casting a blight on the fertility of the farm and flocks of her husband. That is why she always had to entreat God for a child, to save her and her husband's prosperity. For the good of the next year's harvest, it was essential that the wife reproduce successfully and thus guarantee a good crop in the coming year. Succot was the time for this endeavour and it was expressed in visual and symbolic form.
There can be no clearer visual symbolism than the shaking of the lulav (the palm branch and its associated fruits) in the succa. When you see the lulav group, the rigid lance-like palm branch surrounded by the two bushy branches and the cone-shaped etrog, who can doubt that it represents the male organ, and to see it waved vigorously in six directions within the succa womb, that really is the ultimate fertility symbol of Succot
Soup Kitchens Gear Up For Special Succot Meals
Last year, Ya'acov (not his real name), his wife and his two young daughters spent Succot at the soup kitchen of Hazon Yeshaya in Jerusalem. For the family, living below the poverty line and relying on government benefits to get by, it was their seventh year receiving food donations from one of the country's largest humanitarian aid organizations.
"[My daughters] grew up at Hazon Yeshaya," he explains. "We all went there to eat.
"It is very easy for a person to fall between the cracks," adds Ya'acov, describing how his wife got sick, then he was fired from his job and suddenly the family had to rely on others to feed them. "But if people really want to, they can learn how to get out of a desperate situation. They have to learn to take advantage of what is on offer around them."
Throughout the years that he visited the center for food, Ya'acov said he also volunteered in the kitchen until eventually he gained enough confidence to take a course to become a professional chef. "I could see how much pressure the kitchen staff was under. People were waiting a really long time for their food, so I decided to help them out."
It wasn't easy at first, recalls Ya'acov. "But the kitchen staff encouraged me and told me to give it a try. They said if I helped out it would give me the confidence to continue."
The 39-year-old finally qualified a little less than a year ago, and three months ago he found work in a Jerusalem hotel. This Succot, Ya'acov says, even though his family no longer needs the services of Hazon Yeshaya, he will again volunteer during his free days.
By doing so, he has become one of thousands of volunteers who will offer their services this year during Succot at various soup kitchens and outreach centers around the country for many different non-profit organizations.
According to the National Insurance Institute's recently released poverty report, 26.2% of Israelis, more than 1.6 million people, lived below the poverty line in 2005. And a spokesman for the Ministry of Social Affairs estimated Thursday that three thousand people live on Israel's streets.
"Succot is meant to be a happy time, a time when the Jews in the desert were protected as a nation," says Moshe Lefkowitz, director of Meir Panim, another non-profit organization devoted to feeding and caring for Israel's needy. "While a country cannot provide that kind of warmth, a neighbor can, and the role of the individual during this time is to give love and help the weaker people in society."
Both Meir Panim and Hazon Yeshaya have built succot at their centers to ensure that those in need have at least one festive meal during the holiday. Lefkowitz estimates that more than 6,000 people will be fed during the holiday at one of Meir Panim's 15 succot.
At Hazon Yeshaya, founder and CEO Avraham Israel says that a quarter of a million hot meals are prepared each month for its 38 distribution centers around the country.
"It is important for these people to feel the harmony and joy of the holiday," continues Israel. "If we don't do these things then it will feel like any other day of the year. We are Jewish people and we should celebrate the holidays properly."
Twelve succot have been built by the organization, with the one in Jerusalem set to host more than 500 people like Ya'acov, who is now giving back to the organization that helped him and his family.
"I try to return and help whenever I can," he says. "I know how to repay kindness."
As a recipient of free hot meals at the soup kitchen, he noticed the overwhelming burden facing the kitchen staff. "The media do not know what really goes on there," says Ya'acov. "They say they do but they don't and the politicians live in a different world. None of them know what it's like to stand in a line for hours to receive food."
Israel and Lefkowitz highlight the growing poverty among citizens in the North of the country following this summer's war.
"The situation in the North is adding more poverty to this country," says Israel, adding that 12 more Hazon Yeshaya centers are set to open in the coming months. "Since the war many people have lost their jobs or gone out of business, unemployment in that region is almost double of what it is elsewhere in the country."
His comments are backed up by figures collected by organizations such as Latet, which oversees distribution of food packages to more than 100 aid organizations around the country, indicating increases of at least 27% in the number of people requesting aid compared to last year.
Jerusalem Post10.08.2006
Friday, October 06, 2006
Abbas Does Not Really Recognize Israel
A senior Fatah official this week gave the lie to the US-backed Middle East peace process, revealing that even the "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas is ultimately seeking Israel's destruction.
Abu Ahmed, leader of Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, told WorldNetDaily that Abbas only recognizes Israel "because of pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him."
He noted that the "peace" agreement Abbas is seeking with Israel includes the right to flood the Jewish state with millions of so-called "Palestinian refugees," thus demographically destroying the Jewish state.
Abbas has repeatedly pressed for what he calls the "right of return," and made the issue the main plank in his election platform in December 2004.
Some Israelis still remember that Abbas was for nearly three decades the right-hand man of arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat. He is believed to have been behind the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre of nine Israeli athletes.
WND
10.06.2006
Abu Ahmed, leader of Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, told WorldNetDaily that Abbas only recognizes Israel "because of pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him."
He noted that the "peace" agreement Abbas is seeking with Israel includes the right to flood the Jewish state with millions of so-called "Palestinian refugees," thus demographically destroying the Jewish state.
Abbas has repeatedly pressed for what he calls the "right of return," and made the issue the main plank in his election platform in December 2004.
Some Israelis still remember that Abbas was for nearly three decades the right-hand man of arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat. He is believed to have been behind the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre of nine Israeli athletes.
WND
10.06.2006
Thursday, October 05, 2006
You ARE Worthy
"For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of your-selves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9)
There is a lot a information packed into this single verse. To begin with, it says ‘for by grace you are saved THROUGH FAITH’ – let’s stop there for a second.
Grace’ (Gk charis) means benefit, favor or gift. It is from the word ‘grace’ that we get the word ‘gratitude’ or the sense of being grateful.
Note that grace alone does NOT save. Grace is both the extension of the gift and the gratitude of its recipient. To be grateful, one must first receive. While grace is extended to all mankind, not all mankind accepts it.
Not all mankind is grateful. Grace is extended to all, but salvation comes by faith. A simple concept, but many miss the big picture.
Let’s look at the next section of the verse, ‘And that not of yourselves’. What is not of ourselves? Grace? If it refers to grace, then the Lord has wasted words unnecessarily. Of course we can’t extend grace to ourselves! It is not only impossible, such an extension of grace would be meaningless. We haven’t the authority to save ourselves.
Read the verse again. “For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Since we already KNOW that grace ‘is not of ourselves’ that only leaves one other element that can be the ‘gift of God’ and that is saving faith.
So the Scriptures say that even the faith that saves us is a gift from God, and not something we conjure up as a result of our own works, ‘lest anyone should boast.’ This verse is the great equalizer of Christians.
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who has sent Me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:44)
We all come to the Cross the same way; recipients of God’s extension of grace, which we receive by a faith which is God-given. None of us has any reason to feel superior. If we are saved, it is because we were drawn of the Father to the Son.
“It is written in the Prophets, "And they shall all be taught of God." Therefore everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to Me.” (John 6:45) Allow that to sink in.
“So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.” (Matthew 20:16)
And again; “For many are called, but few chosen.” (Matthew 22:14)
And again; “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.” (John 15:16)
“Among whom are ye also the CALLED of Jesus Christ:” (Romans 1:6)
“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the CALLED according to His purpose.” (Romans 8:28)
The goodness of God in converting and saving sinners encourages others to hope in His grace and mercy. Our faith, our conversion, and our eternal salvation, are not of works, lest any man should boast. These things are not brought to pass by any thing done by us, therefore all boasting is shut out.
It is the free gift of God, and the effect of being quickened by His power. It was His purpose, to which he prepared us, by blessing us with the knowledge of His will, and His Holy Spirit producing such a change in us, that we should glorify God by our perseverance to holiness.
‘Holiness’ (Gk hagiasmos) means ‘purification’ which is a PROCESS, also accomplished by God through Jesus.
“Being confident of this very thing, that He which hath BEGUN a good work in you will PERFORM it UNTIL the day of Jesus Christ:” (Phillipians 1:6)
There are no Christians more deserving than others. Because you have not yet achieved the state of holiness others have does not mean you are less favored. We all come to the Cross equally lost, and we all came away equally saved.
Salvation is an eternal state for which each of us were chosen before the world began.
“Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,” Paul writes to Timothy, (2 Timothy 1:9)
"In hope of eternal life, which God, that CANNOT LIE, PROMISED before the world began. . ." (Titus 1:2)
We are eternally secure, because we are eternally saved, which was accomplished in the Mind of God when each of us was called -- BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN!
Let's bring it together. Nobody can come to Christ unless they are drawn by the Father, who provides us with both the extension of the offer of salvation and the faith necessary to receive it, a calling that was sealed in heaven before the world began, according to His purpose and grace.
Our salvation is immediate and eternal, but our purification is a process, which, having been begun in us at the moment of salvation, will be perform in us BY CHRIST until the day we stand before Him. Lest anyone should boast.
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." (Romans 3:10-12)
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:" (Romans 3:23-24)
"I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." (Galatians 2:21)
Legalism runs counter to the clear teaching of Scripture. This is a very difficult doctrine to both teach and understand. It sounds like a license to sin. It is not.
It is an understanding that our relationship to Christ is unique -- that God knows our hearts, and has already judged us accordingly. So that sin cannot reign supreme in our mortal body and thereby render us useless to our calling.
The most effective weapon we have in our war with the enemy is the knowledge that he cannot take away our salvation. There is never a time when we are unworthy to tell others of Jesus Christ.
Paul tells us, "Finally, my brethren, be strong IN THE LORD, and in the power of HIS might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." (Ephesians 6:11-12)
Paul says we put on the 'armor of God' in a specific order. The certainty of the truth of Scripture, the breastplace of righteousness (imputed by Christ) the knowledge of the Gospel and the shield of faith. Our heads are protected by the 'helmet of salvation' - the certainty of our eternal salvation. These are all DEFENSIVE weapons.
Having secured our defense, we then take up our only offensive weapon, the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God.
If the enemy can convince us of our own personal unrighteousness (of which each of us is acutely aware) or cause us to doubt the truth of Scripture or of our faith (which is a gift from God, lest anyone should boast) or cause us to doubt our own salvation, then we will not be able to effectively wield the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God.
God chose each of us, and His plan is to use us to seek out those similarly chosen and introduce them to their Savior. That is our assignment on this earth. THAT is our 'calling.' To spread the Gospel.
That isn't Calvinism -- Calvinism teaches that because the Church was predestinated, we are under no obligation to lead people to Christ -- God has already chosen them so He'll sort it out.
There is a joke about the Calvinist who fell down the stairs, and remarked, "Thank God that's over."
Instead, the Scriptures teach that God foreknew who would be saved, therefore it is predestined. But God also knew who He selected to carry the Word to that person. And the enemy will work overtime to thwart God's will by convincing us we are not worthy to carry it.
As Christians, we have an awesome responsibility before God. We have been assigned to seek out the lost and offer them the Gospel. To accomplish our mission, we need to be fully equipped for the task.
That is what eternal security is all about. Not a license to sin, but rather a certain knowledge that our sin is forgiven.
Jesus said of His sheep (the Church) "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."
"Give" (Gk did?mi) means 'to bestow'. It is a present-tense verb. The Scripture does NOT say, "I WILL give them eternal life," it says it has already been bestowed upon us.
Jesus said that no man can pluck His sheep from His Hand. I am a man. If I can sin my way out of His gift of eternal life, it is neither eternal, nor is it a gift. It then becomes wages, dependent upon my works.
But the Scriptures say; "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23)
And since I, a man, can, by my works, undo His Word, it means His Word is not true.
Our works are the 'fruits' of our labor for Christ. Our labor is to lead others to Christ.
"According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon." (1 Corinthians 3:10)
Our foundation is our salvation, but our obligation is to build upon that foundation by leading others to the Cornerstone of Life. But our individual salvation is already an accomplished fact.
When we stand before the Bema Seat of Christ, "Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but HE HIMSELF SHALL BE SAVED; yet so as by fire." (1 Corinthians 3:13-15)
The mission of the Omega Letter is to provide each one of us with the information necessary to equip us for the work of one on one evangelism.
Henry Ford once said, "I'd rather have one percent of the work of a hundred men, than 100% of the work of one man." Ford was the father of mass production. In the time it takes for one man to build a single car, a hundred men can build a thousand cars.
Don't let the enemy render you powerless. You ARE worthy, not because you are you, but because of Him Who made you worthy according to His will and by His own Hand.
"Therefore said He unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He would send forth labourers into His harvest." (Luke 10:2)
By Jack Kinsella Omega Letter Editor
Blessed Art Thou, O lord our God, King of the Universe who has preserved us, sustained us and brought us to this season.
There is a lot a information packed into this single verse. To begin with, it says ‘for by grace you are saved THROUGH FAITH’ – let’s stop there for a second.
Grace’ (Gk charis) means benefit, favor or gift. It is from the word ‘grace’ that we get the word ‘gratitude’ or the sense of being grateful.
Note that grace alone does NOT save. Grace is both the extension of the gift and the gratitude of its recipient. To be grateful, one must first receive. While grace is extended to all mankind, not all mankind accepts it.
Not all mankind is grateful. Grace is extended to all, but salvation comes by faith. A simple concept, but many miss the big picture.
Let’s look at the next section of the verse, ‘And that not of yourselves’. What is not of ourselves? Grace? If it refers to grace, then the Lord has wasted words unnecessarily. Of course we can’t extend grace to ourselves! It is not only impossible, such an extension of grace would be meaningless. We haven’t the authority to save ourselves.
Read the verse again. “For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Since we already KNOW that grace ‘is not of ourselves’ that only leaves one other element that can be the ‘gift of God’ and that is saving faith.
So the Scriptures say that even the faith that saves us is a gift from God, and not something we conjure up as a result of our own works, ‘lest anyone should boast.’ This verse is the great equalizer of Christians.
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who has sent Me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:44)
We all come to the Cross the same way; recipients of God’s extension of grace, which we receive by a faith which is God-given. None of us has any reason to feel superior. If we are saved, it is because we were drawn of the Father to the Son.
“It is written in the Prophets, "And they shall all be taught of God." Therefore everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to Me.” (John 6:45) Allow that to sink in.
“So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.” (Matthew 20:16)
And again; “For many are called, but few chosen.” (Matthew 22:14)
And again; “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.” (John 15:16)
“Among whom are ye also the CALLED of Jesus Christ:” (Romans 1:6)
“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the CALLED according to His purpose.” (Romans 8:28)
The goodness of God in converting and saving sinners encourages others to hope in His grace and mercy. Our faith, our conversion, and our eternal salvation, are not of works, lest any man should boast. These things are not brought to pass by any thing done by us, therefore all boasting is shut out.
It is the free gift of God, and the effect of being quickened by His power. It was His purpose, to which he prepared us, by blessing us with the knowledge of His will, and His Holy Spirit producing such a change in us, that we should glorify God by our perseverance to holiness.
‘Holiness’ (Gk hagiasmos) means ‘purification’ which is a PROCESS, also accomplished by God through Jesus.
“Being confident of this very thing, that He which hath BEGUN a good work in you will PERFORM it UNTIL the day of Jesus Christ:” (Phillipians 1:6)
There are no Christians more deserving than others. Because you have not yet achieved the state of holiness others have does not mean you are less favored. We all come to the Cross equally lost, and we all came away equally saved.
Salvation is an eternal state for which each of us were chosen before the world began.
“Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,” Paul writes to Timothy, (2 Timothy 1:9)
"In hope of eternal life, which God, that CANNOT LIE, PROMISED before the world began. . ." (Titus 1:2)
We are eternally secure, because we are eternally saved, which was accomplished in the Mind of God when each of us was called -- BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN!
Let's bring it together. Nobody can come to Christ unless they are drawn by the Father, who provides us with both the extension of the offer of salvation and the faith necessary to receive it, a calling that was sealed in heaven before the world began, according to His purpose and grace.
Our salvation is immediate and eternal, but our purification is a process, which, having been begun in us at the moment of salvation, will be perform in us BY CHRIST until the day we stand before Him. Lest anyone should boast.
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." (Romans 3:10-12)
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:" (Romans 3:23-24)
"I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." (Galatians 2:21)
Legalism runs counter to the clear teaching of Scripture. This is a very difficult doctrine to both teach and understand. It sounds like a license to sin. It is not.
It is an understanding that our relationship to Christ is unique -- that God knows our hearts, and has already judged us accordingly. So that sin cannot reign supreme in our mortal body and thereby render us useless to our calling.
The most effective weapon we have in our war with the enemy is the knowledge that he cannot take away our salvation. There is never a time when we are unworthy to tell others of Jesus Christ.
Paul tells us, "Finally, my brethren, be strong IN THE LORD, and in the power of HIS might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." (Ephesians 6:11-12)
Paul says we put on the 'armor of God' in a specific order. The certainty of the truth of Scripture, the breastplace of righteousness (imputed by Christ) the knowledge of the Gospel and the shield of faith. Our heads are protected by the 'helmet of salvation' - the certainty of our eternal salvation. These are all DEFENSIVE weapons.
Having secured our defense, we then take up our only offensive weapon, the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God.
If the enemy can convince us of our own personal unrighteousness (of which each of us is acutely aware) or cause us to doubt the truth of Scripture or of our faith (which is a gift from God, lest anyone should boast) or cause us to doubt our own salvation, then we will not be able to effectively wield the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God.
God chose each of us, and His plan is to use us to seek out those similarly chosen and introduce them to their Savior. That is our assignment on this earth. THAT is our 'calling.' To spread the Gospel.
That isn't Calvinism -- Calvinism teaches that because the Church was predestinated, we are under no obligation to lead people to Christ -- God has already chosen them so He'll sort it out.
There is a joke about the Calvinist who fell down the stairs, and remarked, "Thank God that's over."
Instead, the Scriptures teach that God foreknew who would be saved, therefore it is predestined. But God also knew who He selected to carry the Word to that person. And the enemy will work overtime to thwart God's will by convincing us we are not worthy to carry it.
As Christians, we have an awesome responsibility before God. We have been assigned to seek out the lost and offer them the Gospel. To accomplish our mission, we need to be fully equipped for the task.
That is what eternal security is all about. Not a license to sin, but rather a certain knowledge that our sin is forgiven.
Jesus said of His sheep (the Church) "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."
"Give" (Gk did?mi) means 'to bestow'. It is a present-tense verb. The Scripture does NOT say, "I WILL give them eternal life," it says it has already been bestowed upon us.
Jesus said that no man can pluck His sheep from His Hand. I am a man. If I can sin my way out of His gift of eternal life, it is neither eternal, nor is it a gift. It then becomes wages, dependent upon my works.
But the Scriptures say; "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23)
And since I, a man, can, by my works, undo His Word, it means His Word is not true.
Our works are the 'fruits' of our labor for Christ. Our labor is to lead others to Christ.
"According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon." (1 Corinthians 3:10)
Our foundation is our salvation, but our obligation is to build upon that foundation by leading others to the Cornerstone of Life. But our individual salvation is already an accomplished fact.
When we stand before the Bema Seat of Christ, "Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but HE HIMSELF SHALL BE SAVED; yet so as by fire." (1 Corinthians 3:13-15)
The mission of the Omega Letter is to provide each one of us with the information necessary to equip us for the work of one on one evangelism.
Henry Ford once said, "I'd rather have one percent of the work of a hundred men, than 100% of the work of one man." Ford was the father of mass production. In the time it takes for one man to build a single car, a hundred men can build a thousand cars.
Don't let the enemy render you powerless. You ARE worthy, not because you are you, but because of Him Who made you worthy according to His will and by His own Hand.
"Therefore said He unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He would send forth labourers into His harvest." (Luke 10:2)
By Jack Kinsella Omega Letter Editor
Blessed Art Thou, O lord our God, King of the Universe who has preserved us, sustained us and brought us to this season.
Report: Oil Discovered In Dead Sea Area
Oil has been discovered in the Dead Sea area, Dr. Eli Tenenbaum, an official from Genco, the national company responsible for drilling in the region, reported on Wednesday. Tenenbaum stated that the amount of oil could reach commercial levels.
"We noticed that the pressure in the area was very high and when we opened the tap, oil started flowing freely for several minutes," Tenenbaum told Channel 10.
Tenenbaum said that the workers washed their hands with the "black gold" when they made the discovery. "We hope it was the first of many [such discoveries]," he added excitedly.
Not far from the drilling site, the crew spotted an oil reserve that Tenenbaum described as "very attractive," which they believed contained between four and six million barrels, worth an estimated 300 million dollars.
The operation began 10 years ago but was put on hold since it was not deemed economically viable. However, due to the recent soaring oil prices the discovery of new oil sources became necessary.
Genco was drilling at a depth of 2000 meters.
Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer said it was "just the beginning" and that is was vital to find out whether the oil field was commercially viable or not.
"It is an encouraging sign," he said. "We are checking the entire area and we are opening the whole region for drilling. We will give our full support to any company that wants to try."
Jerusalem Post
10.04.2006
"We noticed that the pressure in the area was very high and when we opened the tap, oil started flowing freely for several minutes," Tenenbaum told Channel 10.
Tenenbaum said that the workers washed their hands with the "black gold" when they made the discovery. "We hope it was the first of many [such discoveries]," he added excitedly.
Not far from the drilling site, the crew spotted an oil reserve that Tenenbaum described as "very attractive," which they believed contained between four and six million barrels, worth an estimated 300 million dollars.
The operation began 10 years ago but was put on hold since it was not deemed economically viable. However, due to the recent soaring oil prices the discovery of new oil sources became necessary.
Genco was drilling at a depth of 2000 meters.
Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer said it was "just the beginning" and that is was vital to find out whether the oil field was commercially viable or not.
"It is an encouraging sign," he said. "We are checking the entire area and we are opening the whole region for drilling. We will give our full support to any company that wants to try."
Jerusalem Post
10.04.2006
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
The Gap Between Islam And Peace
When George W. Bush says "Islam is peace," and Tony Blair insists the war now begun "has nothing to do with Islam," some of us scratch our heads and try, brows furrowed, to reconcile their soothing words with our frightening vision: the dirty war on Western civilization waged by evil forces in the name of Islam.
The experts tell us militant Islamic fundamentalists, or "Islamists," represent a narrow, if murderous, fringe. They number no more than 10, maybe 15, percent of all Muslims. That estimate works out to somewhere between 100 million and 150 million people. Which is a lot of murderous fringe.
Meanwhile, where is that peaceable majority overflowing Islamdom? Are they filling the streets in unity with America's effort to eradicate Islamist terrorism, "marginal" though its supporters may be? Hardly. Only last week, UPI reported that Pakistan's Tahirul Qadri had become "the first prominent Muslim scholar to condemn Osama bin Laden and the Taliban so strongly in public." Even if the wire service missed a bin Laden-condemning cleric here or there, the singularity of Qadri's achievement is striking. Indeed, sampling some of the world's largest mosques, The New York Times recently found clerics from England to Pakistan denouncing America, saluting the Taliban, or even declaring solidarity with Osama bin Laden.
In Cairo, the paper reported, Friday prayers at the famous Al Azhar University mosque ended with a rousing chant of: "America is the enemy of Arabs and Muslims. Let us die in our war against America." In New Delhi's largest mosque, the imam urged "moral" support for Taliban jihad. In Nairobi, services progressed from attacking the United States to the parable: "Every Muslim is Osama bin Laden."
Every Muslim, of course, is not Osama bin Laden. But why don't more Muslims say so, quite loudly and very specifically? Muslim condolences after Sept. 11 very often came across as rather generic expressions of sympathy, equally as suitable for a natural disaster as for a terrorist act of war committed by co-religionists. Little sense of the magnitude of events is being communicated, and, thus, little recognition of the urgent need for civilized people of all faiths and nations to denounce this evil, vociferously and by name, and array themselves in warring solidarity against it.
What accounts for this weakness? And what is a reflexively tolerant, post-multicultural Westerner to make of it? Our dauntless leaders may repeat that the Islamist threat has nothing do with Islam, but, frankly, their mantra is getting a little ridiculous. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Amir Taheri, an Iranian author and journalist, recently declared that "to claim the attacks had nothing to do with Islam amounts to a whitewash." It's also, he wrote, a "disservice to Muslims, who need to cast a critical glance at the way their faith is taught, lived and practiced."
Taheri, frank as he was, did not offer how-to specifics. But with reporters mining Islam for information previously limited to specialists, it's clear how important this call for Islamic reform really is. As the horrors of our Taliban enemy have become common knowledge, we also learn, for example, that a similar strain of Islam, Wahabbism, is practiced and exported by our so-called ally Saudi Arabia. Examining a textbook for one of five compulsory religion classes for Saudi 10th-graders, The New York Times quoted a lesson regarding whom "good Muslims" should befriend. "After examining a number of scriptures which warn of the dangers of having Christian and Jewish friends, the lesson concludes: `It is compulsory for the Muslims to be loyal to each other and to consider infidels their enemy.'"
This comes straight from the Quran. "O believers," the Quran says (Sura 5, Verse 50), "do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are the allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is surely one of them." As historian Paul Johnson noted in National Review, such "canonical commands" — along with "slay the idolaters wheresoever you find them" (Sura 9, Verse 5) — "cannot be explained away or softened by modern theological exegesis, because there is no such science in Islam." Johnson goes on to explain that contrary to the evolving nature of both Christianity and Judaism, Islam has never undergone any update, reformation or enlightenment since its inception in the seventh century. "Islam," he wrote, "remains a religion of the Dark Ages.
Jewish World Review
10.04.2006
The experts tell us militant Islamic fundamentalists, or "Islamists," represent a narrow, if murderous, fringe. They number no more than 10, maybe 15, percent of all Muslims. That estimate works out to somewhere between 100 million and 150 million people. Which is a lot of murderous fringe.
Meanwhile, where is that peaceable majority overflowing Islamdom? Are they filling the streets in unity with America's effort to eradicate Islamist terrorism, "marginal" though its supporters may be? Hardly. Only last week, UPI reported that Pakistan's Tahirul Qadri had become "the first prominent Muslim scholar to condemn Osama bin Laden and the Taliban so strongly in public." Even if the wire service missed a bin Laden-condemning cleric here or there, the singularity of Qadri's achievement is striking. Indeed, sampling some of the world's largest mosques, The New York Times recently found clerics from England to Pakistan denouncing America, saluting the Taliban, or even declaring solidarity with Osama bin Laden.
In Cairo, the paper reported, Friday prayers at the famous Al Azhar University mosque ended with a rousing chant of: "America is the enemy of Arabs and Muslims. Let us die in our war against America." In New Delhi's largest mosque, the imam urged "moral" support for Taliban jihad. In Nairobi, services progressed from attacking the United States to the parable: "Every Muslim is Osama bin Laden."
Every Muslim, of course, is not Osama bin Laden. But why don't more Muslims say so, quite loudly and very specifically? Muslim condolences after Sept. 11 very often came across as rather generic expressions of sympathy, equally as suitable for a natural disaster as for a terrorist act of war committed by co-religionists. Little sense of the magnitude of events is being communicated, and, thus, little recognition of the urgent need for civilized people of all faiths and nations to denounce this evil, vociferously and by name, and array themselves in warring solidarity against it.
What accounts for this weakness? And what is a reflexively tolerant, post-multicultural Westerner to make of it? Our dauntless leaders may repeat that the Islamist threat has nothing do with Islam, but, frankly, their mantra is getting a little ridiculous. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Amir Taheri, an Iranian author and journalist, recently declared that "to claim the attacks had nothing to do with Islam amounts to a whitewash." It's also, he wrote, a "disservice to Muslims, who need to cast a critical glance at the way their faith is taught, lived and practiced."
Taheri, frank as he was, did not offer how-to specifics. But with reporters mining Islam for information previously limited to specialists, it's clear how important this call for Islamic reform really is. As the horrors of our Taliban enemy have become common knowledge, we also learn, for example, that a similar strain of Islam, Wahabbism, is practiced and exported by our so-called ally Saudi Arabia. Examining a textbook for one of five compulsory religion classes for Saudi 10th-graders, The New York Times quoted a lesson regarding whom "good Muslims" should befriend. "After examining a number of scriptures which warn of the dangers of having Christian and Jewish friends, the lesson concludes: `It is compulsory for the Muslims to be loyal to each other and to consider infidels their enemy.'"
This comes straight from the Quran. "O believers," the Quran says (Sura 5, Verse 50), "do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are the allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is surely one of them." As historian Paul Johnson noted in National Review, such "canonical commands" — along with "slay the idolaters wheresoever you find them" (Sura 9, Verse 5) — "cannot be explained away or softened by modern theological exegesis, because there is no such science in Islam." Johnson goes on to explain that contrary to the evolving nature of both Christianity and Judaism, Islam has never undergone any update, reformation or enlightenment since its inception in the seventh century. "Islam," he wrote, "remains a religion of the Dark Ages.
Jewish World Review
10.04.2006
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Shalit Kidnappers Reject Egyptian-Brokered Deal
Hamas terrorists who are holding IDF Cpl Gilad Shalit hostage have rejected a deal to swap the Israeli soldier for hundreds of Palestinian Authority Arab prisoners.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abu Gheit said in an interview on Al Arabiya television that terrorists rejected a deal “to free women, children, elders and those who have been serving long prison terms” in exchange for Shalit.
The prisoner exchange “could have guaranteed freeing 900 to 1,000 prisoners,” said Abu Gheit, “but sadly they have decided to keep holding him.”
Egypt lost patience with Hamas last week and demanded in a harsh letter written by Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman to Damascus-based Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal that Shalit be released by October 22nd, the end of the Islamic month of Ramadan.
Suleiman also said Meshaal would be held responsible for any Israeli military operation carried out in Gaza. IDF Chief of General Staff Dan Halutz said before the Yom Kippur holiday on Sunday that Israel may ratchet up the pressure in Gaza in response to increased Kassam rocket attacks on Sderot and other southern Israeli communities.
A spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), the Hamas terror organization that kidnapped Shalit, said Monday that such an attack would mean the file of the soldier may get closed again.” The spokesman, Abu Mujahed, warned, "If they enter Gaza and kill people or even if they eliminate all Gazans, they will never regain their soldier."
Arutz Sheva
10.03.2006
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abu Gheit said in an interview on Al Arabiya television that terrorists rejected a deal “to free women, children, elders and those who have been serving long prison terms” in exchange for Shalit.
The prisoner exchange “could have guaranteed freeing 900 to 1,000 prisoners,” said Abu Gheit, “but sadly they have decided to keep holding him.”
Egypt lost patience with Hamas last week and demanded in a harsh letter written by Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman to Damascus-based Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal that Shalit be released by October 22nd, the end of the Islamic month of Ramadan.
Suleiman also said Meshaal would be held responsible for any Israeli military operation carried out in Gaza. IDF Chief of General Staff Dan Halutz said before the Yom Kippur holiday on Sunday that Israel may ratchet up the pressure in Gaza in response to increased Kassam rocket attacks on Sderot and other southern Israeli communities.
A spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), the Hamas terror organization that kidnapped Shalit, said Monday that such an attack would mean the file of the soldier may get closed again.” The spokesman, Abu Mujahed, warned, "If they enter Gaza and kill people or even if they eliminate all Gazans, they will never regain their soldier."
Arutz Sheva
10.03.2006
Monday, October 02, 2006
The Day of Atonement ~ 2006
Jews all over the world are in the midst of their high and holy days sometimes called the Days of Awe. They start with Rosh Hashanah (Feast of Trumpets) which was September 22nd and continue for ten days, bringing us to Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement). Judaism teaches that without the temple and its sacrificial system, Jews must practice acts or righteousness. They believe that all of our deeds (both good and bad) during this past year will pass before the Judge of all the earth the LORD GOD of ISRAEL.
The emphasis is on repentance before God and that certainly is a good thing! However, the Bible teaches that our LORD YESHUA was the final sacrifice for our sins, and it is not our righteous acts that save us (Titus 3:5), but His vicarious (substitutionary) atonement. Yom Kipper (Day of Atonement) is the only fast day that God ever commanded of His people.
The High Priest (and only Him!) focused on two goats on that day. One goat was killed and the blood was taken by the High Priest into the Holy of Holies (only time in the year this happens!) and placed on the lid of the Ark of the Covenant the lid is called the mercy seat. The Greek word that was used to translate the Hebrew for mercy seat is the word propitiation. It is clear from I John 2:2 and 4:9-10 that our Lord Yeshua is the propitiation for our sins. The word refers to the satisfaction of the wrath of God against sin.
The second goat was kept alive and the High Priest would hold on tightly and confess all the sins of the people; then the goat would be released into the wilderness (called the azazel) and no one was to go after it. It is a beautiful reminder of the Greek word for forgiveness which means to send away. The Lord has removed our sins as far as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12) and cast them into the depths of the sea (Micah 7:18-20) our Lord Yeshua also suffered and died outside the gate (Hebrews 13:12) a reminder that He also is represented by the goat that was released, symbolizing the complete removal of our sins WHAT A SAVIOR! By Dr. David Hocking
Hope for Today Ministries, PO Box 3927, Tustin, CA 92781
The emphasis is on repentance before God and that certainly is a good thing! However, the Bible teaches that our LORD YESHUA was the final sacrifice for our sins, and it is not our righteous acts that save us (Titus 3:5), but His vicarious (substitutionary) atonement. Yom Kipper (Day of Atonement) is the only fast day that God ever commanded of His people.
The High Priest (and only Him!) focused on two goats on that day. One goat was killed and the blood was taken by the High Priest into the Holy of Holies (only time in the year this happens!) and placed on the lid of the Ark of the Covenant the lid is called the mercy seat. The Greek word that was used to translate the Hebrew for mercy seat is the word propitiation. It is clear from I John 2:2 and 4:9-10 that our Lord Yeshua is the propitiation for our sins. The word refers to the satisfaction of the wrath of God against sin.
The second goat was kept alive and the High Priest would hold on tightly and confess all the sins of the people; then the goat would be released into the wilderness (called the azazel) and no one was to go after it. It is a beautiful reminder of the Greek word for forgiveness which means to send away. The Lord has removed our sins as far as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12) and cast them into the depths of the sea (Micah 7:18-20) our Lord Yeshua also suffered and died outside the gate (Hebrews 13:12) a reminder that He also is represented by the goat that was released, symbolizing the complete removal of our sins WHAT A SAVIOR! By Dr. David Hocking
Hope for Today Ministries, PO Box 3927, Tustin, CA 92781
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
